RAM NARESH Vs. CIVIL JUDGE J D PRATAPGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJIV Sharma, J. Heard Sri P. K. Khare, Counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. C. Mukherji, Counsel appearing for the answering respondents.

(2.) IT is submitted that Brij Mohan, father of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and Jageshwar father of respondent Nos. 7 to 10 preferred a Suit No. 256 of 1999 in the Court of Munsif Sadar, Pratapgarh against the petitioner's father and Bachchu Lal for possession and damages with respect to plot No. 612. In the plaint it was averred the Paltu Ram, the predecessor in interest of respondents had purchased the house with trees standing on the land in an auction sale and on 30. 11. 1912, they had obtained the possession. Siyambar, the brother of Paltu Ram took the possession of the house which was ultimately inherited by Smt. Radha Kunwari, the widow of Paltu Ram. IT is said that through a gift deed dated 7th August, 1935 the house and the trees standing on it were transferred in favour of father of respondent No. 3-5 and father of respondent No. 7-10.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the aforesaid Suit No. 256 of 1969 filed by the respondents plaintiff was decreed by the judg ment and order dated 22. 10. 1973 and a direction was issued to the defendants to handover the possession of disputed land. He also pointed out that the land of which the possession has been ordered to be given by the defendants to the plaintiff is not clear from the judgment of the Trial Court.