TULSA BAI Vs. GANESH RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered in this second appeal preferred by the appellants herein/defendants No.1 and 2 is as under:-

(2.) The suit land bearing Khasra No.294/2, area 1.39 acres, Khasra No.214/2, area 0.33 acre and Khasra No.216/1, area 0.10 acre situated at village Dansara, Tahsil Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh are subject-matter of the dispute in the instant second appeal. Originally all the suit lands belonged to one Thanda Ram. Firstly, the land bearing Khasra No.294/2, area 1.39 acre is said to have been sold by Thanda Ram in favour of Nanhu Ram on 21.6.72 vide Ex.P-1 and the plaintiff has purchased the suit land from defendants No.3 to 7 i.e. legal representatives of Nanhu Ram. Likewise, the land bearing Khasra No.214/2 area 0.33 acre and Khasra No.216/1 area 0.10 acre are said to have been purchased by Gahira Ram from Thanda Ram vide registered sale deed dated 19.12.78 (Ex.P-2) and the plaintiff is said to have been purchased the suit land from legal representatives of Nanhu Ram including Gahiraram by registered sale deed dated 31.3.95 (Ex.P-3).

(3.) Civil Suit NO.12A/81 (hereinafter called as "Suit NO.1") filed by one Nanhuram against daughters of Thanda Ram namely Sonai and Tulsa-defendant No.1 and one Jogender Singh, father of the plaintiffs seeking declaration of title in respect of the suit lands claiming himself to be adopted son of Thanda Ram. In that suit, present appellant Tulsa Bai, daughter of Thanda Ram filed written statement and denied the fact of sale by her father. That civil Suit No.1 was decreed by the trial Court in favour of the plaintiff Nanhu on 25.3.85 (Ex.P-5) upholding his claim to the property of deceased Thanda Ram in respect of the property shown in Schedule 'A' of the plaint of Suit No.1, but in first appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by Sonae and Tulsa (appellant herein) questioning the judgment and decree of the trial Court of Suit No.1, by the judgment and decree dated 2.1.86 the first appellate Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court with regard to the property shown in Schedule 'A' and the suit fled by plaintiff Nanhuram was dismissed. The judgment and decree of the first appellate Court was affirmed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Second Appeal No.13/1986 and ultimately the SLP against the judgment of the second appellate Court was also not entertained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.