RISHIKESH Vs. LAKHESWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 02.01.2001 passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Mahasamund in Civil Appeal No. 25-A/98 affirming the judgment and decree dated 13.11.1992 passed by the 2nd Civil Judge Class-II, Mahasamund in C.S. No. 270-A/91, whereby the trial Court has decreed the suit for possession after demolition of structure, has been admitted on the following substantial question of law:

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused both the judgments and records of the Courts below.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that within two years of dispossession the respondent had filed the suit simpliciter for possession after dispossession of the appellants herein. Virtually, it was a suit for reinstatement of a Bhumiswami improperly dispossessed within two years of such dispossession, which is squarely covered by Section 250 of the Code, 1959 and as per Section 257(x) of the Code, 1959, the civil Court is not having jurisdiction inter alia it contains bar. He further submits that the suit was not based on title and no other relief has been claimed, therefore, the suit was not maintainable in terms of Section 250 read with Section 257(x) of the Code, 1959.