URARAN DAS BANJARE Vs. SUKHBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on admission.

(2.) Appellant/defendant No.1 has preferred this second appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity "CPC") against the judgment and decree dtd. 9/8/2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Bemetara in Civil Appeal No.9A/2017 thereby dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 1/4/2017 passed in Civil Suit No.22-A/2014 by which learned Civil Judge Class-I Bemetara (CG) has decreed the suit of respondent No.1/ plaintiff for declaration of title and separate possession after partition.

(3.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that plaintiff filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title; share to the extent of one-fourth in suit properties described in Schedule 'A', 'B' & 'C' to plaint and possession. It was pleaded that plaintiff and defendants are children born out of wedlock of Firtu and Brijbai. Land of Schedule-A admeasuring 7.63 hectare of 15 different khasra numbers, situated at PH No.38 Village Ghursena, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Bemetaera, was recorded in name of Firtu. This is ancestral land of the parties. From the income of land of Schedule-A, Firtu had purchased land of Schedule-B bearing Khasra No.578 area 0.30 hectare situated in PH No.38, Village Ghursena, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Bemetara, in the name of plaintiff and Brijbai (mother of plaintiff). Similarly, land bearing Khasra No.684 area 1.09 hectare situated in PH No.34, Village Bhopsara, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Bemetara, as described in Schedule-C, was purchased in the name of defendant No.1. After death of Firtu, plaintiff being one of legal heirs demanded her share in ancestral property, which was denied by defendant No.1. Upon inquiry, plaintiff came to know that ancestral land of Schedule 'A' is recorded in the name of defendant No.1 only and therefore, she filed an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer (R) Bemetara. It was further pleaded that plaintiff being legal heir of Firtu is entitled for equal share in the ancestral property of Schedule 'A' and 'C', partition among the family members had not taken place, plaintiff never consented for not recording her name in Patwari record nor had she relinquished her share in ancestral property or put her thumb impression on any such document.