PALURAM Vs. BHUKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This appeal was admitted for hearing on 17/8/2016 on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the first appellate Court is justified in reversing the well reasoned finding of the trial Court regarding recording a perverse finding particularly with regard to purchase of suit land by plaintiffs?"

(3.) The appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit seeking declaration, possession and permanent injunction in respect of the property in dispute on the pleadings, inter alia, that the properties in dispute were purchased by him by three registered sale deeds dtd. 15/3/1954, EX.P-1, 15/3/1954, Ex.P-2 and 29/3/1962, Ex.P-3 from Bhukha, Hari Sai and Bhukha respectively and on the basis of those sale deeds, the plaintiffs acquired title over the disputed lands. Further case of the plaintiffs was that later on, the defendant-Bhukha started interfering with their possession not only in respect of those properties, which were sold by Bhukha under two registered sale deeds, Ex.P-1 & Ex.P-3, but also in respect of those properties, which were sold to the plaintiffs by Hari Sai vide Ex.P-2. According to the plaintiffs, one of the seller Hari Sai, brother of Bhukha never disputed it. It is only Bhukha, the defendant, who was not only denying title of the plaintiffs, but also disturbing their possession, which led to initiation of proceedings under Sec. 145 of Cr.P.C. and various orders passed, giving rise to cause of action for the plaintiffs to file a suit seeking reliefs prayed therein.