RADHESHYAM @ ULLA Vs. BANGU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the Defendant challenging the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court, decreeing the Plaintiffs' suit for declaration and permanent injunction while setting aside the Trial Court's judgment whereby Plaintiffs' suit was dismissed.

(2.) Plaintiffs case, as reflected in the plaint, is that one Bhagirathi (died in 1946) was their grandfather who owned and possessed the suit land described in Schedule-A with the plaint. Their father Daya (died in 1973) was the only son of late Bhagirathi. On 1/08/2001 the Plaintiff became aware that one Darbari S/o Matro Gadheri, the lather of Defendant No. 1 Radheshyam has surreptitiously got recorded his name in the revenue records pertaining to lands covered in Schedule-B which is the suit land. Plaintiffs applied for certified copies of the record of rights of the year 1944-45 and for the first time they became aware on 20/08/2001, on receipt of the said record of right that name of Defendant's father Darbari has been jointly recorded with the name of Plaintiffs' father Daya in the revenue records and the said entry of the name of Defendant's father is illegal and without any title. Plaintiffs name were recorded in the revenue records after death of their father Daya in 1973 and at that time the name of Defendant's father was not recorded in the revenue records as he had absolutely no right, title or interest in the suit land.

(3.) According to the Plaintiffs their grandfather Bhagirathi had only one son namely Daya and the Defendant Radheshyam or his father Darbari do not belong to their family. They are in possession of the land, however since after coming to know that Defendant is trying to alienate the suit land, the present suit was filed.