- (1.) THIS second appeal under section 100 CPC is directed against judgment and decree dated 26.02.2013 passed by Additional District Judge, Sumerpur, whereby, the appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 11.10.2006 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bali dismissing the suit filed by the appellants, was upheld.
(2.) THE facts in brief may be noticed thus : the appellants - plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of house on 08.01.1992, inter alia, with the averments that in village Dujana their father late Thakur Bheem Singh had a house and after his death the appellants/plaintiffs and their mother Smt. Narayan Kanwar being legal representatives of late Shri Bheem Singh were entitled to 1/3rd share each in the suit property; their father Shri Bheem Singh expired on 20.05.1961 and for arrears of rent revenue against him, the State Government attached the disputed house in the year 1977 and thereafter on 19.02.1977 the same was auctioned under the provisions of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act for the disputed arrears pertaining to the Samvat years 2026 to 2035; the house was auctioned in favour of Javer Chand and Mohan Lal, who deposited 1/4th of the amount on 22.07.1977 and remaining 3/4th amount was deposited by them on 31.03.1977; as no notice was given to their mother, she was not aware of the said auction proceedings; however, she came to know of the same in the month of December, 1990 only, whereafter, a registered notice was given to the auction purchasers Javer Chand and Mohan Lal calling upon them to vacate and hand over the possession of the disputed house, which was replied by the said auction purchasers contending that the property was purchased by them from the State Government on auction for a sum of Rs.34,701/ - and, therefore, the present suit was filed seeking declaration and possession as the auction proceedings were null and void and in the alternative the amount of Rs.34,701/ -. A written statement was filed by the defendants; it was claimed that the auction was rightly held and the auction purchasers have become owners by adverse possession and the suit was barred by limitation.
(3.) THE trial court framed seven issues. On behalf of the plaintiffs four witnesses were examined. On behalf of defendants seven witnesses were examined and PW -1 Pushpendra Kumari again appeared in rebuttal. The mother Smt. Narayan Kanwar was impleaded as defendant No.6 and during pendency of the suit on her death her name was deleted from the array of parties.;