LAWS(CHH)-2013-11-10

STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. CHANDRA BHAN SINGH

Decided On November 29, 2013
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Appellant
V/S
Chandra Bhan Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The instant second appeal has been preferred by the appellants challenging the judgement and decree dated 25.11.2004 passed by Additional District Judge, Korba, in Civil Appeal No.1- A/2004. By the said judgement dated 25.11.2004, the first appellate Court i.e. Additional District Judge, Korba, has affirmed and confirmed the judgement and decree dated 30.12.2003 passed by the trial Court i.e. Civil Judge, Class-II, Korba, in Civil Suit No.193- A/2002.

(3.) Facts leading to the instant appeal are that the plaintiffs/ respondents No.1 to 4 filed a suit before the trial Court for declaration of title and possession. The said suit was registered as Civil Suit No.193-A/2002. The said civil suit was filed by plaintiffs/ respondents No.1 to 4 in respect of the suit land situated at Khasra No.65/1 in village Rampur, measuring 2.75 acre and the land at Khasra No.173/1 in village Rampur, measuring 4.90 acre. Total area in the suit land is 7.65 acres. The contention of plaintiffs was that the land was in the name of their forefathers i.e. initially in the name of Thakur Maksudhan Singh, even before the time the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code came into the force, and that the name of Thakur Maksudhan Singh was entered in the revenue records as Bhumi Swami over the said suit land. The name of Thakur Maksudhan Singh finds place in the Jama Bandi of the year 1954-55 and that the forefathers of the plaintiffs were in constant possession of the said suit land. After the demise of Thakur Maksudhan Singh, the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 to 4 and respondents No.5 to 7 i.e. defendants No.3 to 5 in the civil suit, by virtue of succession, acquired the rights in the said land. The dispute arose when the Forest Department of the State Government, whose land said to be adjacent to the suit land, while encircling the forest land by barbed wire, forcibly entered into the suit land claiming it to be the forest land. It, therefore, became necessary for the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 to 4 to file a suit.