DWARIKA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by plaintiff under Section 100 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree passed by first appellate Court dated 25.06.2005 in Civil Appeal No. 34/2003 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court dated 29.08.2003 in Civil Suit No. 107 -A/2000. Plaintiff's suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) PLAINTIFF filed a suit inter alia contending that the suit land was given to the plaintiff's ancestors by the then Jamidar of the area and thereafter, after abolition of Zamidari system, his ancestors and thereafter plaintiff has been in continuous, peaceful and uninterrupted possession over the suit land, doing cultivation and harvesting crops thereupon. It is submitted that by virtue of long possession, plaintiff has perfected title over the suit by adverse possession. Having apprehended forcible dispossession, plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction.

(3.) ON the aforesaid pleadings, trial Court framed issues and allowed parties to lead evidence. Upon critical evaluation of the entire evidence on record, trial Court has dismissed the suit. It is found that plaintiff failed to establish his continuous, uninterrupted and peaceful possession over the suit land for period of 30 years as well as the alleged claim as regards the suit land on the basis of Patta Annexure P -5. Accordingly, the trial Court dismissed the suit. On appeal, first appellate Court has re -appreciated the entire evidence on record and confirmed the findings of facts recorded by the trial Court. However, the first appellate Court in paragraph 10 has found that in revenue records, appellant/plaintiff is found to be in possession but only as an encroacher and not as Bhumi Swami.