SHAKUNTALA Vs. ROBERT ANTHONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave Granted.

(2.) The original defendant challenges the judgment dtd. 7/2/2020 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Second Appeal No.290 of 2009. All the three courts have taken differing views.

(3.) The plaintiffs ' suit being Civil Suit No.51-A/2007 before the 5th Civil Judge, Class I, Bilaspur [ Civil Court], was decreed and the sale deed executed by the defendants was held to be invalid. The plaintiffs were held entitled for 1/4th share of Khasra No.690/7. Defendants were entitled to vacant possession of a specified portion. The 1st Additional District Judge, Bilaspur [ First Appellate Court] in the First Appeal filed by the original defendants, set aside the decree of the Civil Court and held that both plaintiffs and defendants collectively are entitled to half share each from their respective mother. However, since defendants 1 to 5 had sold their share to Defendant 6 the sale was held to be valid. The High Court, in terms of the impugned judgment, held the two widows of Mattus Anthony[ MA]namely Filomina and Shyam Bai, together entitled to 1/3rd of the property, and the children of Filomina (plaintiffs) being the lineal descendants of MA, entitled to 2/3rd of the property.