TILAK RAM Vs. BARATO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against judgment/ decree dated 01.10.2014 passed by Third Additional District Judge, Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 5A/2010, wherein the said court dismissed the suit filed by the appellants/ plaintiffs for declaration of title and injunction regarding land bearing Khasra No. 360, 1087, 1117, 1120, 1197, 1229, 1713, 2213, 2217, 2219, 2226, 2228, 2231, 2233, 2949, 2957, 2958, 2963, 3009, 3013 and 3047 (total 21 Khasra Nos.) area admeasuring 0.50, 0.35, 0.11, 0.10, 0.22, 0.32, 0.13, 0.22, 0.16, 0.19, 0.13, 0.06, 0.20, 0.71, 0.34, 0.57, 0.18, 0.54, 0.20, 0.49 and 0.14 acres (total area 5.86 Aare) (13.95 Acres) respectively situated at Village- Khopa, Patwari Halka No. 23, Revenue Circle- Bhatgaon, Tahsil- Bhayyathan (Surajpur), District- Surguja (C.G.).

(2.) As per the appellants/ plaintiffs, name of respondent No. 1-Barato was recorded as landlord in Khasra Panchshala (Ex. P/1 and P/2) and B-1 (Ex. P/3 and P/4) of 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80 as also in the year 2007, 2008 and 2009. In the said record, name of the appellants is recorded as possessor. The land was earlier settled in the name of Amarsai. After death of Amarsai, the appellants were in possession of the land peacefully since last 40 years, but respondent No. 2- Anook Ram claimed over the property on the basis of sale- deed dated 18.03.2008 i.e. why the suit was filed before the trial court which was dismissed against the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submits as under:-