KAMALDAS Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF has come up in second appeal against the reversing judgment of the Court below contending that this appeal involves substantial question of law and hence, needs to be admitted for final hearing as contemplated under section 100 of CP. Code. The impugned judgment and decree is dated 24.9.2001, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sardarpur, District Dhar in C.A. No. 15 -A of 2000, which in turn arises out of Civil Suit No. 55 -A of 1999, decided by Civil Judge Class I, Sardarpur, on 13.10.2000. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether this second appeal filed at the instance of the plaintiff involves any substantial question of law so as to attract the provisions of section 100 of CP. Code?

(2.) HEARD Shri A.S. Garg, learned senior counsel with Shri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant and Miss Seema Sharma, learned P.L. for respondents on the question of admission.

(3.) THE plaintiff came to the Court for a declaration that he is the owner and Bhumiswami of the land in question and secondly temple in question by name Narsingh Mandir, is a private temple. It was decreed ex parte in favour of the plaintiff. This issue was gone into on evidence adduced by the plaintiff and accordingly, first appellate Court held that neither the plaintiff is a owner or Bhumiswami of the land in question, nor any declaration to that effect can be granted in his favour. Accordingly, the order of the trial Court was reversed by the First Appellate Court in an appeal preferred by the defendant - State, giving rise to filing of this second appeal by the plaintiff.