ground that this land was earlier recorded in the name of his grandfather, namely, Jagatram, who was a Lamberdar of the village and the land was in possession of Lutu Nai as Lamberdar Jagatram had kept Lutu Nai as his servant and given him the said land for his livelihood. After death of Lutu Nai, his family members did not use the suit land for agriculture. Therefore, son of Jagatram, namely, Bhairav had started using the suit land. After death of Bhairav, his son, i.e., the plaintiff started using the suit land for agriculture purpose and is also having peaceful and continuous possession over the land since last 40-50 years. It was further pleaded that when the plaintiff for the purpose of obtaining a loan obtained B1 and Khasra Panchshala of the suit land then he came to know for the first time that the land was recorded as the grass land in favour of the State of Chhattisgarh without issuing any notice to the plaintiff or his father and thereby without providing any opportunity of hearing and without any publication of a village notice, the land is wrongly recorded in the name of the State of Chhattisgarh as the grass land. The plaintiff filed an application under Section 57(2) of the Land Revenue Code before the S.D.O. (Revenue), Kota, which was rejected vide order dated 23.7.2013. The plaintiff also claimed his title on the ground of adverse possession over the suit land.
