JAMEEL AHMED CHOUDHARY Vs. DINESH NARAYAN SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission.

(2.) This first appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 20/12/2017 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge to the Court of 1st Additional District Judge, Bhopal, in civil suit no.193-A/09, whereby suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of a piece of land admeasuring 3200 sq.ft, bearing in khasra no.902 total area 13.97 acre situated in ward no.43, Bhopal, has been dismissed.

(3.) In short, the facts are that the plaintiff instituted a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction with the allegations that the owner of disputed land namely Chunnilal had sold it to the plaintiff on 10/1/1984 after receiving consideration of sale of Rs.20,000.00 which was purchased by ancestor of Chunnilal namely Dulichand in the year 1956 vide sale deed dtd. 27/2/1956 and 2/3/1956 respectively and his title was confirmed upto the High Court. It is alleged that the respondent 1 had not executed the sale deed but assured him to execute the sale deed by way of decree of the Court. It is alleged that the plaintiff is doing business on the disputed land (3200 sq.ft.) and the defendant 1 on 15/7/1985 tried to dispossess the plaintiff, whereas plaintiff being in possession for a long period, is also paying house tax from the year 2002-03 and has also obtained electricity connection as well as permission from the District Industries Center. It is also alleged that the defendant 1 in lieu of acquisition of the disputed land, made demand for alternative land, in pursuance of which, the spot was inspected and the plaintiff was found in possession for 10-15 years. It is also alleged that treating the plaintiff to be encroacher, dispossession proceedings were started in the year 2007. Accordingly, claiming himself to be in possession, the plaintiff prayed for decree in his favour on the basis of adverse possession.