RAM SINGH Vs. NARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial question of law :-

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that respondent/plaintiffs Narayan s/o Mukurdrao and Ramchandra s/o Baldeo both filed a suit against the deceased appellant/defendant Ramsingh seeking declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners of land bearing Survey Nos. 220 and 221 situated at Village Tarana, including the well and trees thereon and the defendants having no right or interest in the same and defendants be restrained not to interfere in the possession of the plaintiffs. The suit was contested by the appellant/defendant on the ground that the civil Court has no jurisdiction under section 190 of the M.P. Land Revenue- Code, 1959, only the Revenue Courts are entitled to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Survey No. 221 is an uncultivated land having Mango trees on which plaintiffs cannot claim any declaration and injunction. The trial Court decreed the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs and declared that respondents/plaintiffs are Bhumiswami over Survey Nos. 220 and 221 and also declared that the plaintiff is also having right to take water for irrigation purposes from the well and also granted an injunction in favour of the respondent/plaintiffs but declared that the plaintiff is not having any right over the fruits bearing trees standing on the aforesaid land. The trial Court also recorded a finding that the land in dispute was given on lease to the plaintiffs and their predecessors and under section 168 (2) the defendant was neither old nor infirm and under section 168 (2) was not entitled to lease out the same. It was further held that on 2.10.1959 under section 185, the plaintiffs become occupancy tenant and entitled to be recorded as Bhumiswami under section 190 with effect from 1.7.1960. The first appellate Court confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissed the appeal and also dismissed the cross-objections which were filed by the respondents/plaintiffs.

(3.) THE findings recorded by both the Courts below are based on appreciation of evidence on record and during the course of the arguments learned counsel for the appellants/defendants could not point out any perversity or illegality in the findings. Survey No. 220 is an agricultural land; and is in possession of the respondents/plaintiffs from the time of their ancestrals.