Dismissed

Ramayan Ram and Ors. v. Vidya Nand Pd. and Ors.

Patna HC16 Jul 2014SA/186/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissed an appeal filed by defendants in a title partition suit. The court upheld the judgments of the Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court, finding that the plaintiffs' title was supported by cogent evidence and no perversity was established.

What did the court decide?

The second appeal was dismissed; the decree in the partition suit in favour of the plaintiffs was affirmed.

Ramayan Ram and Ors. Vs Vidya Nand Pd. and Ors. — Partition | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Second Appeal No.186 of 2012

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Ramayan Ram S/O Ramjeet Ram R/O Vill-Mauza Karariya Thakurai, Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, Distt-Gopalganj. 2. Kishori Lal Ram S/O Ramjeet Ram R/O Vill-Mauza Karariya Thakurai, Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, Distt-Gopalganj. 3. Yugal Kishore Ram S/O Ramjeet Ram R/O Vill-Mauza Karariya Thakurai, Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, DisttGopalganj. 4. Surendra Ram S/O Ramjeet Ram R/O Vill-Mauza Karariya Thakurai, Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, Distt-Gopalganj. 5. Feku Ram S/O Har Narayan Ram R/O Vill-Dharahara, Pergana-Kuari, P.S.-Kateya, Distt-Gopalganj.

¶4

.... .... Appellant/s Versus

¶5

Vidya Nand Prasad S/O Vishwanath Sah R/O Vill-Karariya Thakurai @ Bhitari Karairya Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, DisttGopalganj

¶6

Kaushal Kishore Prasad S/O Vidya Nand Prasad R/O Vill-Karariya Thakurai @ Bhitari Karairya Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.Phulwariya, Distt-Gopalganj

¶7

Balmiki Prasad S/O Vidya Nand Prasad R/O Vill-Karariya Thakurai @ Bhitari Karairya Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, DisttGopalganj

¶8

Dhananjay Prasad S/O Vidya Nand Prasad R/O Vill-Karariya Thakurai @ Bhitari Karairya Pergana-Kuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, DisttGopalganj

¶9

Rajesh Prasad Minor S/O Vidya Nand Prasad Under The Grardianship Of His Father R/O Vill-Karariya Thakurai @ Bhitari Karariya PerganaKuari, P.O.-Koila Deo, P.S.-Phulwariya, Distt-Gopalganj

¶10

Dadan Tiwari S/O Late Muneshwar Tiwary R/O Vill-Mishrawaliya, P.S.-Mirganj, Distt-Gopalganj 7. Surendra Sharma S/O Late Chandra Sharma R/O Vill-Kararia Thakurai, P.S.-Phulwaria, P.O.-Koila Deo, Distt-Gopalganj

¶11

Deo Shankar Sharma S/O Late Chandra Sharma R/O Vill-Kararia Thakurai, P.S.-Phulwaria, P.O.-Koila Deo, Distt-Gopalganj 9. Prabhunath Sharma S/O Late Chandra Sharma R/O Vill-Kararia Thakurai, P.S.-Phulwaria, P.O.-Koila Deo, Distt-Gopalganj 10. Motilal Sharma S/O Late Bhajan Sharma R/O Vill-Kararia Thakurai, P.S.-Phulwaria, P.O.-Koila Deo, Distt-Gopalganj

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad Sinha Mr. Rajendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER

¶14

Patna High Court SA No.186 of 2012 (8) dt.16-07-2014

¶15

¶16

8 16-07-2014

¶17

Heard Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad Sinha in support of

¶18

the appeal.

¶19

The defendants have filed the present appeal aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 23.02.2012 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gopalganj in T.A. No. 43 of 2001/10 of 2011 confirming the judgment and decree dated 19.03.2001 and 30.03.2001 respectively passed by learned Munsif, Gopalganj in Title Partition Suit No. 19 of 1989.

¶20

For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred by their status/position at the trial.

¶21

Plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration of their title in respect of the land comprised in Schedule-1. He also prayed for confirmation of their possession. Briefly stated, the case of the plaintiffs is that Sheo Barat Thakur, ancestor of defendant 2^nd set had three sons. After death of Sheo Barat Thakur, his three sons had separated. The land of khata no. 198 was self-acquired property of Ram Khelawan Thakur, one of the sons of Sheo Barat Thakur but names of the three brothers were wrongly recorded in the revisional survey Khatiyan. The sons of Lakshman Thakur had gifted their share in khata no. 199 to grandson of Lakshman Thakur namely Surendra Thakur, the sole heir of Ram Khelawan Thakur. The defendant no. 1 got a sale deed executed by Surendra

¶22

Patna High Court SA No.186 of 2012 (8) dt.16-07-2014

¶23

¶24

Thakur in the name of Feku Ram and based on that, they started threatening the plaintiffs’ possession over the land resulting in filing of the suit.

¶25

The defendants filed written statement contending therein that half of plot no. 1576 towards north was in the share of Surendra Thakur whereas half whereof was in the share of Lakshman Thakur. Surendra Thakur executed registered deed in favour of the defendants in respect of three kathas of plot no. 1576 and 4 kathas of plot no. 1676 on 11.1.1988 and since then they are in possession. The defendants also denied the claim of plaintiffs of having purchased the land from Surendra Thakur.

¶26

The learned Trial Court on a consideration of the case of the parties framed diverse issues. Considering the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties, the learned Trial Court answered all the issues in favour of the plaintiffs and the suit was decreed. Paragraph nos. 9 to 14 record the findings on core issues by the learned Trial Court. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the defendant filed appeal vide T.A. No. 43 of 2001. The learned Lower Appellate Court in the light of pleadings on record and the submissions made by the defendants/appellants once again appraised the evidence on record keeping in focus the issues which were framed by the learned Trial Court. The contentions

¶27

Patna High Court SA No.186 of 2012 (8) dt.16-07-2014

¶28

¶29

made by the appellants to assail the decree were noticed in paragraph 7 of the judgment. The learned Lower Appellate Court in the light of the said submissions of the parties considered the evidence only to conclude that the entire consideration amount was actually paid whereafter the sale deed was executed on 03.11.1987 and the registration receipts were also exchanged between the parties. The case put up by the defendants that the entire amount was not paid resulting in cancellation of deed and subsequent sale in favour of the defendants was not supported by the evidence on record. Having held so, the appeal was dismissed.

¶30

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned Lower Appellate Court committed serious illegality in not independently considering the point formulated at (viii) which reads as under:

¶31

“(VIII) Whether plaintiffs are entitled to get partition with respect to lands described in schedule-II of the plaint?”

¶32

In my view, the said submission of the counsel is not well founded considering the fact that the appellants had not raised the issue in this regard before the learned Lower Appellate Court. That apart, the relief in the suit was for declaration of title in respect of entire suit land covered by the sale deed. Both the Courts below have found the claim of the plaintiffs supported by

¶33

Patna High Court SA No.186 of 2012 (8) dt.16-07-2014

¶34

¶35

cogent and reliable evidence. Such concurrent findings recorded by the two Courts below do not merit to be interfered with unless they are shown to be wholly perverse and/or illogical. This Court finds that no such case is made out.

¶36

In my view, the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law for consideration. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶37

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/-

¶38

Ramayan Ram and Ors. v. Vidya Nand Pd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramayan Ram and Ors. v. Vidya Nand Pd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kabutari Devi and Ors. Vs Paras Prasad and Anr.

Indradeo Sah Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Sodha Dusadh Vs Ajit Prasad Gore and Ors.

Shanti Devi and Ors. Vs Bachchi Devi and Ors.

Sheo Mangal Sharma Vs Sipahi Singh and Ors.

Arun Kumar and Anr. Vs Raghunandan Prasad Mandal and Ors.