CHURAMANI RAMPRAPANNA BRAHMIN Vs. RAMADHAR GANESH PRASAD BRAHMIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs-petitioners filed a suit (C. S. No. 14-A of 1983) for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants-respondents in the Court of Second Civil Judge, Class II, Satna. According to the plaintiffs, pursuant to partition of joint ancestral lands between the common ancestors of the parties, the suit lands had fallen to the share of Badri and Brijbhushan and the remaining lands had fallen to the share of Ramnivas. On the death of Badri and Brijbhushan, the suit lands had devolved on Suryadeen, Shyamsunder and Ramsunder and, thereafter, as a result of partition between the said persons, they finally devolved on the plaintiffs. On the other hand, after the death of Ramni was, the other lands had devolved on his widow Sarmania and after her death the said lands devolved on defendants Nos. 1 to 11.

(2.) ACCORDING to the further case of the plaintiffs-petitioners, though the suit lands had devolved on them in the manner as stated above, and they continued to be in possession of the same since then, the names of defendants-respondents came to be wrongly recorded as Bhumiswami of the said lands in the land records in 1975-1976 due to some mistake. According to the plaintiffs, the said mistaken mutation of the names of defendants 1 to 11 as Bhumiswami of the suit lands in the land records did not confer any right, title or interest in respect of the said lands in their favour and that otherwise also even if the defendants had any right, title or interest in the suit lands as alleged, they lost the same by virtue of the plaintiff's adverse possession over the same. It was explained by the plaintiffs that it was since the defendants were threatening to interfere with their possession over the suit lands on the basis of mistaken mutation of their names over the same that it became necessary for them to institute the suit in question for declaration and permanent injunction against them.

(3.) IN their written statement, the defendants-respondents denied the case set up by the plaintiffs-petitioners. It was submitted by them that the plaintiffs were never in possession of the suit lands and that the said lands were in fact in possession of defendants Ramnihore, Ramnaresh, Rambahori and Jagdish Prasad. It was submitted by them that at the time of settlement of records the lands in question had been recorded in the name of Thakurdas, after the death of Thakurdas the lands came to be recorded in the name of Sarmania and after the death of Sarmania the names of defendants 1 to 11 were mutated over them. It was alleged by them that it was in fact the petitioners who were wrongly trying to interfere with the possession of defendants 2, 6, 8 and 10 over the suit lands.