HAFIZ MUKHTAR AHMAD Vs. MUMTAZ AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been directed against the judgment of Shri Ravindra Nath Misra, Vlth Additional District Judge, Azamgarh, dated 27-10-1986 in Civil Appeal No. 249 of 1985 Mumtaz Ahmad v. Hafiz Mukhtar.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary details the disputed land in this appeal is plot no. 31 situate in Mohalla Domanpura, Kasba Maunath Bhanjan, district Azamgarh. Undisputedly the aforesaid plot belonged to one Jai Karan who had two sons, namely Ram Briksh and Jhillu. The plaintiffs appellants before this Court are the transferee from Ram Briksh whereas the defendants respondents are transferees from Jhillu. The dispute between the parties is whether the disputed plot had been partitioned between Ram Briksh and Jhillu before the execution of sale deeds by them. The plaintiffs appellants had filed the suit for injunction against the defendants respondents restraining them from interfering with the title and possession of the plaintiffs. The claim of the plaintiffs was denied by the defendants opposite parties and various other issues were raised at the instance of the defendants opposite parties. The trial court framed necessary issues and decreed the plaintiffs' suit through its judgment dated 25-5-1985. Against the judgment of the trial court the defendants had gone in appeal and the appellate court gave judgment for the defendants opposite parties as is evident from the impugned judgment dated 27-10-1986. Thereafter the plaintiffs have approached this Court under Section 100 CPC.

(3.) IN rejoinder the learned counsel for the plaintiffs appellants has drawn my attention to the rulings reported in Patit Pavneshwar Mahadev Ji-appellant v. Nagar Maha Palika, Kanpur- respondent, 1979 AWC 305 and it has been contended that the submission made on behalf of the defendants respondents cannot be sustained in view of the aforesaid rulings.