RAMSWAROOP Vs. STATE OF C G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial questions of law formulated and to be answered by this Court in Plaintiffs' second appeal are as under:--

(2.) Questioning the legal acceptability and sustainability of the impugned judgment and decree dated 13/03/2006 passed by Second Additional District Judge (F.T.C.) Mungeli, District Bilaspur in Civil Appeal No. 53-A/2005, this instant second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs under Section 100 of the CPC, in which, two substantial questions of law has been formulated as mentioned in opening paragraph of this judgment.

(3.) Mr. Somnath Verma, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/plaintiffs, while criticizing the judgment and decree passed by two Courts below would vehemently submit that both the Courts below have fallen into palpable error of jurisdiction in holding that proprietor-Shri Ramcharan was not in possession of the suit land on the date of vesting, and further fallen into error in holding that the suit land was not a home-farm land. He would lastly submit that the findings recorded by two Courts below are perverse and contrary to the record, and is liable to be set aside and plaintiffs suit be decreed with cost.