KESHARI PRASAD Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners/ plaintiffs have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 17.11.12 (Annexure P/17) passed by the Ist Judge to the Court of I ADJ, Panna in Misc. Civil Appeal No.17/12 affirming the order dated 18.10.12 passed by the II Civil Judge Class-II, Panna in COS No.44-A/12 whereby their application filed under Order 39 rule 1 and 2 of the CPC for issuing at interim injunction restraining the respondents to dispossess them from the disputed property described in the application as well as in the suit by themselves or from employees or the agency under execution of order dated 21.8.12 passed by the SDO respondent No.1 in Revenue Case No.97/B-121/2011-12 was dismissed.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the House No.38,39,40,41 and 42 situated in Katra Mohalla, Panna are recorded in the name of mother of the appellants, namely, Bhawani Bai in the record of local authorities according to which the aforesaid house is situated on the Nazul land bearing survey No. NE 1/2-B. Out of such land the disputed land bearing No.101 is having the area 561 square meter which is shown in the map Annexure-A annexed with the plaint. Initially the owner/ occupier of the house was one Manik Joo Rao and in the courtyard of such house a temple of the Deity Bihari Joo was also situated. Such property being the personal property of Manik Joo Rao, he had given the same to Murlidhar the father of the petitioners vide some document in writing dated 15.7.1930. Since then their father Murlidhar alias Kishore Prasad Goswami was remain in occupation of such house as owner of the same. After death of said Murlidhar I n the year 1950, his widow, namely, Bhawani Bai got mutated her name in the record of the local authorities and in such premises, the petitioners are coming in possession of such property. Said Bhawani Bai also passed away in the year 1997. Later, in "Jan Sunwai" held by SDO Panna in Revenue Case No.97/B-121/11-12 vide order dated 21.8.12 the aforesaid disputed house No.38 to 42 has been declared to be the property of public temple of Bihari Joo and pursuant to that the name of Collector as Manager on behalf of State of Madhya Pradesh on the such property was directed to be mutated in the record of Municipality. Simultaneously, the Nazul Tehsildar, Panna was also directed to dispossess the petitioners from such property under the provision of section 248 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code ( in short the 'Code' ). Subsequent to such order the petitioners/plaintiffs had filed the impugned suit for declaration of title over the aforesaid property with further declaration to declare the aforesaid order of SDO dated 21.8.12 to be ab initio void and perpetual injunction to protect the possession of the petitioners is also prayed against the respondents. Along with it some application for issuing ad interim injunction, as stated above, has also been filed.

(3.) In reply of the respondents by denying the averments of the application of the petitioners regarding title of the petitioners it is stated that the disputed houses were remained the property of Deity Bihari Joo temple and the petitioners did not have any right or title over the same. It is also stated that as alleged the document dated 15.7.1930 being unregistered is not admissible. In addition to it, such document is also challenged on the ground that in such document the name of the scriber, his signature and the address is also not mentioned, hence the same is not admissible and on the basis of such document, no right or title could be inferred in favor of the petitioners or their predecessor and, in such premises, the aforesaid order of the SDO was justified and the direction to take action against the petitioners under section 248 of the Code was also justified. In such premises, the prayer for dismissal of the application was made.