Dismissed

Smt. Chand Kaur W/O Late Shri Chandgiram v. Smt. Banarasi Devi W/O Shri Dwarka Prasad

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2023CSA/61/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed this civil second appeal. The court held that lower courts correctly found plaintiffs owned the property via valid pattas and affirmed this finding, rejecting the appellants' claim that the land was government revenue land. No substantial question of law existed.

What did the court decide?

The civil second appeal is dismissed as being devoid of any substantial question of law.

Smt. Chand Kaur W/O Late Shri Chandgiram Vs Smt. Banarasi Devi… — Partition | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 61/2019

¶3

Smt. Chand Kaur W/o Late Shri Chandgiram,

¶4

Ramdhan S/o Mamanram,

¶5

Both are R/o Village Bhir Tehsil Buhana District Jhunjhunu (Raj)

¶6

----Appellants/Defendants

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Banarasi Devi W/o Shri Dwarka Prasad,

¶9

Mandan Lal S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad,

¶10

Rohitash S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad,

¶11

Gajanand S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad, All are R/o Village Bhir Tehsil Buhana District Jhunjhunu (Raj)

¶12

----Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶13

Rajjo Devi W/o Harnarayan,

¶14

Mahendra S/o Harnarayan,

¶15

Jallae Singh S/o Dwarka Prasad,

¶16

All are R/o Village Bhir Tehsil Buhana District Jhunjhunu (Raj)

¶17

----Proforma Respondents

¶18

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Bhawani Shanker Sharma for Mr. O.P. Jhajhria For Respondent(s) :

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order

¶20

17/04/2023

¶21

This civil second appeal has preferred by the appellants/defendants (for brevity, “the defendants”) aggrieved against the judgement dated 16.11.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (for brevity, “the learned trial Court”) whereby, the Civil Suit No.14/2000 filed by the respondents/plaintiffs (for brevity, “the

¶22

[CSA-61/2019]

¶23

(2 of 3)

¶24

plaintiffs”) for mandatory injunction and possession was decreed which has been upheld by the learned District Judge, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (for brevity, “the learned appellate Court”) vide its judgement and decree dated 14.12.2018 dismissing the Civil First Appeal No.38/2009 CIS No.50/2014.

¶25

The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction and possession against the defendants stating therein that they are under ownership of the subject land through two pattas dated 13.01.1975 each measuring 150 square yards. It was alleged that the defendants have encroached upon a part of their land. Therefore, the decree as aforesaid was prayed for.

¶26

The defendants in their joint written statement submitted that the subject land was revenue land and the Gram Panchayat was not competent to issue patta in its respect. It was submitted that they have been in possession of the subject land since long.

¶27

On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Court framed 9 issues including relief.

¶28

After recording evidence of the respective parties, the learned trial Court decreed the suit vide judgement and decree dated 16.11.2009 which has been upheld and affirmed by the learned appellate Court vide its judgement and decree dated 14.12.2018.

¶29

While assailing the judgement and decree dated 16.11.2009, the only contention advanced by learned counsel for the appellants, inviting attention of this Court towards the finding recorded by the learned appellate Court vide issue no.1, would be that the learned Courts did not appreciate that pattas in their

¶30

[CSA-61/2019]

¶31

(3 of 3)

¶32

favour were never challenged by the plaintiffs before any competent forum. He, therefore, prays that the civil second appeal be allowed, the judgement and decree dated 14.12.2018 be quashed and set aside and the suit filed by the plaintiffs be dismissed.

¶33

Heard. Considered.

¶34

The contention advanced by learned counsel for the appellants is wholly misconceived inasmuch as while deciding the issue no.1, the learned appellate Court was appreciating the validity of the pattas issued in favour of the plaintiffs. Indisputably, the appellants have not claimed their ownership over the subject property through any patta; rather, it was their case that the subject land is part of government revenue land. While deciding the issues no.1, 2, & 3, a categorical finding has been recorded by the learned trial Court that the plaintiffs were under ownership and possession of the subject property on the strength of pattas issued by the competent authority and the findings have been affirmed by the learned appellate Court. Since, learned counsel for the appellants could not satisfy this Court that the aforesaid concurrent findings of facts recorded by the learned Courts suffer from any illegality, infirmity or perversity, in the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Courts did not err in decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiffs.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid, this civil second appeal is dismissed being devoid of any substantial question of law.

¶36

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶37

PRAGATI/71

Smt. Chand Kaur W/O Late Shri Chandgiram v. Smt. Banarasi Devi W/O Shri Dwarka Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chand Kaur W/O Late Shri Chandgiram v. Smt. Banarasi Devi W/O Shri Dwarka Prasad

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

Ulhas Kumar Agarwal Andors Vs Dr Manjit Singh and Another

Meera Devi D/O Shri Devi Singh W/O Omveer Singh Vs Shri Bhupendra Yadav

Jagan Singh Vs Shri Rajeshwar Singh and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar Meena S/O Kanwar Pal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Singh Raghav S/O Mahaveer Singh Raghav Vs the State of Rajasthan

Purshottam S/O Late Liladhar, Vs Jawala Prasad Meena Tehsildar, Chirawa