RAGHUNATH PRASAD Vs. RAJMANI PATEL AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is of defendant No. 1 who has lost from both the Courts below.

(2.) On 20-4-1980 (more than 31 years ago) the plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that they are joint owner of the suit property and the mutation order dated 23-1-1979 as null and void and in case the plaintiffs are not found to be in possession the possession of the suit property be delivered to them. The suit was filed by three plaintiffs namely Teja Bhagirathi sons of Rampyare and Shiv Balak S/o Ahivaran against five defendants namely Raghunath S/o Rajdhar, Rajdhar and Shobhnath sons of Jageshwar, Smt. Gujratiya Wd/o Lalmani and Ramjiyawan S/o Vanshpati. According to the plaint averments Teja, Bhagirathi, widow of Lalmani and Shiv Balak have been recorded as 2/3rd owner in the revenue record and defendants Rajdhar and Shobhnath have been recorded as 1/6th owner and defendant Ramjiyawan has been recorded as 1/6th owner in the revenue record. Further it has been pleaded that Gujratiya Wd/o Lalmani (defendant No. 4) sold the disputed lands along with her other lands in which she was having 1/6th share vide registered sale-deed dated 22-2-1973 to plaintiff No. 2 Bhagirathi and since that date the plaintiff No. 2 Bhagirathi is having 1/3rd share in the suit property and after the execution of the sale-deed his name has also been mutated in the revenue record on 13-2- 1970.

(3.) Further case of plaintiff is that the defendant No. 1 Raghunath (appellant) is the son of Rajdhar (defendant No. 2) who manufactured a forged document mentioning in it that share of Gujartiya Wd/o Lalmani which has been transferred to plaintiff No. 2 Bhagirathi, by keeping the plaintiffs in dark jot the suit property mutated in his name which is null and void and by such mutation order the tights of the plaintiffs are not jeopardized nor their rights have been transferred in defendant No. 1 Raghunath.