KALUBHA CHAMPUBHA DARBAR Vs. PRABHASHANKAR PARSOTTAMBHAI MAHETA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Second Appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned 3 rd Additional District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), at Viramgam in Regular Civil Appeal No. 33 of 2018 on 24/2/2021 whereby, the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) was pleased to confirm the judgement and decree dtd. 31/3/2017 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Mandal in Regular Civil Suit No. 250 of 2016 (Old Regular Civil Suit No. 317 of 2015).

(2.) The appellant herein is the original defendant and the respondent- original plaintiff had filed a suit for property situated in the outskirt of Mouje Vitthalpur, Taluka Mandal bearing Block/Survey No. 147 paiki in revenue account No. 212 and admeasuring 0/87/1 (H.are.sq.m.) [hereinafter referred to as the "disputed suit property"] mainly stating that the agricultural property is in the ownership and possession of the plaintiff and he had purchased the said property by a registered sale-deed from the original owners Chhaganbhai Makwana, Dhudabhai and Arjanbhai which was registered before the Sub Registrar Viramgam at Sr.No. 290. That, the appellant-original defendant was trying to restrain the respondent-original plaintiff and hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction. The learned trial Court after the summons of the suit was duly served and the original defendant appeared, framed the issues and recorded the entire evidence of both the parties and after hearing the submissions of the learned advocates for both the parties, the learned trial Court was pleased to partly allow the suit of the plaintiff by the judgement and decree dtd. 31/3/2017. That, the defendant being aggrieved by the said judgement and decree filed Regular Civil Appeal No. 33 of 2018 and after hearing the learned advocate for both the parties, the learned 3 rd Additional District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Viramgam was pleased to reject the appeal and confirmed the judgement and decree of learned Principal Civil Judge, Mandal vide order dtd. 24/2/2021. Hence, the present Second Appeal.

(3.) The appellant in the appeal memo has mainly contended that the impugned order is against the settled position of law and the courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence on record. That, the dispute is with regard to the location of the land and the learned Courts below have erred while passing the impugned judgement and orders. The appellant has filed the present appeal and framed the following substantial questions of law:-