KHORBAHARA Vs. TETKURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law formulated and to be answered in the instant defendants' second appeal is as under:

(2.) During pendency of the instant appeal, Respondent 1/plaintif 1 Tetkuram died and, therefore, Respondents 1-A to 1-F, who are legal heirs of Tetkuram are brought on record. Further, defendant 1/Appellant 1 Khorbahara also died during pendency of this appeal and his legal heirs are already on record and, therefore, his name has been deleted from the array of cause title.

(3.) Facts of the case, in short, are that a suit for declaration, perpetual injunction and possession was fled by Respondents 1 to 3 claiming that the land bearing Khasra No. 888 area 0.10 hectares is ancestral property, which was earlier recorded in the name of their ancestor Ramdayal and after his death it is recorded in the name of Respondents No. 2 and 3 and original Respondent No. 1. However, the Appellants/defendants erected a house over the suit land despite objection. The plaintifs as also defendant Jagdish applied for demarcation. On their applications, the Tahsildar Berla submitted his report dtd. 21/1/2002. On this report, the plaintifs came to know that they are owners of the suit land on which the defendants have illegally made encroachment. With a view to end the dispute, it was agreed between the parties that 15 dismil out of the total 25 dismil land shall be purchased by the defendants for a sum of Rs.15,000.00 and agreement to this efect was entered into between the parties. However, the defendants neither got the sale deed executed nor did vacate the suit land. They also constructed a house over a part of the disputed land in the previous years. A legal notice for handing over possession of the suit land was sent and thereafter the suit was fled.