RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. DWARIKA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on admission and formulation of substantial question of law in this second appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff.

(2.) By the impugned judgment and decree, the First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff vide judgment and decree dtd. 25/7/2012 passed by the learned 2nd Upper District Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.) in Civil Appeal No.112A/2011 affirming the judgment and decree of the Trial Court dtd. 4/7/2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge Class­II, Baloda Bazar (C.G.) in Civil Suit No.53-A/2010, whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the suit preferred by the appellant/plaintiff.

(3.) Mr. Koshta, learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff, would submit that both the Courts below have concurrently erred in holding that Ex-P/1 is agreement to sale, pursuant to which the appellant came in possession of the suit land bearing Khasra No.967/2, area 0.076 hectare, as such the possession is permissive and the plaintiff is not entitled for decree of declaration of title and permanent injunction, as the plaintiff has perfected the title by way of adverse possession by recording a finding perverse to the record. As such, the appeal involves substantial question of law for determination and deserves to be admitted for hearing.