SAWANTRAM SAHU Vs. DULLORIN BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties shall be referred to as per their status before the trial Court.

(2.) Challenge in this appeal filed under Sec. 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') is to the judgment and decree dtd. 21/11/2022 passed in Civil Suit No.01-A/2021 passed by Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon CG (for short 'Trial Court').

(3.) Facts in nutshell: The plaintiff and the defendant No.1 are the real brother and sister. Their father Faguwaram was the owner of the land measuring 0.405 hectare, Khasra No. 469/2 situate in village Lakholi, Rajnandgaon. After the death of Faguwaram mutation took place on 5/3/1998 and the land in dispute was recorded in the name of the plaintiff in the revenue records whereas by virtue of a mutual compromise, the defendant No.1 was given the land situate at village Chikhli with a house constructed thereon. Since 1998 itself plaintiff is in peaceful cultivating possession of the disputed land. Land in dispute is said to be the ancestral property and the same got registered in the name of the plaintiff by dint of an order dtd. 27/1/1999 passed in Revenue Case No. 185-A/2006 - 1998-99 and that the defendant No.1 was also aware of all this. It is worthwhile to mention here that in family partition, the plaintiff was given the suit property whereas the defendant No.1 was given the property situate at Shanti Nagar but even then the defendant No.1 got her name entered in the revenue record in respect of the suit property by the Tehsildar, Rajnandgaon after a lapse of 21 years. The appeal preferred by the plaintiff before the Sub Divisional officer (Revenue) also came to be dismissed on 21/12/2020 without assigning any reason. It is averred in the plaint that the plaintiff being in need of money for his treatment, for the business of his children and also for constructing a house, entered into an agreement with one Manish Khandelwal of Rajnandgaon in connection with sale of the suit land, and when the defendant No.1 came to know about this, she in connivance with defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and also using their political influence, she submitted an application for mutation before the concerned Tehsildar and by virtue of order dtd. 30/10/2019 the suit land got recorded in her name. Against the order dtd. 30/10/2019 the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the SDO (Revenue) but during the pendency of that appeal the defendant No.1 obtained the order from the Tehsildar dtd. 19/3/2020 and got the Fard Batwara pertaining to the suit land done in her favour, and in hot haste transferred the land of Khasra No. 469/16 area 0.50 acre/0.202 hectare and Khasra No. 460/17 area 0.02 acre/0.008 hectare, total Khasra 02, total area 0.52 acre/0.210 hectare (described in schedule "B") in favour of defendant Nos. 2 and 3 without consideration. Against the order dtd. 19/3/2020, the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the SDO (Revenue), which however has been rejected vide order dtd. 30/7/2021 without assigning any valid reason. Defendant No.1 is averred to be a cunning woman and was always trying to grab the land of the plaintiff, and that acting in connivance with defendant Nos. 2 and 3 she got the property detailed in "Schedule A" divided and then transferred the property detailed in "Schedule B" to defendant Nos. 2 and 3, though she had got her separate share at village Chikhli.