AWTAR SINGH Vs. SURAJA BAI W/O SHYAMCHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal preferred by the defendants was admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law:­ "Whether the lower appellate Court did not properly appreciate the evidence oral as well as documentary on record and fell into error in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court by recording a finding that the respondents/plaintiffs were the title­ holders of Nazul Plot Number 1983, 1984/1 of Sheet No. 6 of Dongargarh Town measuring area 3135 Square feet."

(2.) Original plaintiff Shyamcharan Sahu filed a civil suit for declaration of title and possession stating inter alia that the suit land bearing Khasra No. 1983 and 1984/1 situated at Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon is owned by him in which he has already constructed a house and defendants have encroached upon some portion of the suit land. In a complaint made by the petitioner against his neighbor Prem Singh, the Tahsildar directed the petitioner to get his land demarcated pursuant to which the demarcation report was submitted on 10/10/2000 from which plaintiff got to know that defendants have constructed a house upon 3,135 Sq. ft. of the suit land owned by the plaintiff. From the demarcation report, plaintiff came to know that defendants No. 1 and 2 got sale deed dated 21/01/1974 executed in their favour whereas plaintiff's father Ramsingh Sahu was the title­holder of the suit land then and he did not execute any sale deed in favour of the defendants, as such, plaintiff is entitled for declaration of title and possession of the suit land after demolishing the house constructed by the defendants.

(3.) Defendants filed their written statement and set up a plea that the suit land was owned by Premlal, Kanhaiya and chaitu who executed the sale deed dated 21/01/1974 in favour of defendants No. 1 and 2 for a sale consideration amount of ? 10,000/­ and thereafter, they came into possession of the suit land and constructed a house upon it. The defendants further pleaded that plaintiff's suit is barred by limitation.