ABDUL MUTTALLIK Vs. ABDUL W AHID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 100 of the CPC has been preferred by the appellant Abdul Mutallik being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 15/12/2015 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.43/2014 by the Additional District Judge, Susner, District Shajapur, arising out of the judgment and decree dtd. 21/8/2014 passed in Civil Suit No.80-A/2013 and 81-A/2013 by the Additional Civil Judge, Susner, District Shajapur.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant Abdul Mutallik and respondent No.1 Abdul Wahid are real brothers and respondent No.2 Akhtar Jahan is their sister. Their father was Abdul Rauf, who died on 9/1/2008. Their mother was Jubeda Khatun, who died on 19/8/1990. On 11/1/2011, respondent No.1 Abdul Wahid instituted an action before the trial Court for declaration of his title over half share in the suit lands, for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession over the same and for mesne profits at Rs.25,000.00. He submitted that the mother of the parties namely Jubeda Khatun was the owner of the suit lands and upon her death 20 years ago the same devolved equally upon him and the appellant and their father Abdul Rauf. Upon death of Abdul Rauf he and the appellant have become the owners of half share each in the suit lands. He demanded his share from the appellant but he refused to do so upon which he acquired knowledge that he has got himself recorded over the entire suit lands by order dtd. 24/5/1991 passed in Namantaran Panji No.15 dtd. 18/6/1991. He has thereafter started denying his title to the suit lands.

(3.) The claim was contested by the appellant submitting that during his life time Abdul Rauf had given his entire property to his wife Jubeda Khatun. On 10/6/1991 Jubeda Bee, respondent No.1 Abdul Wahid and their sister Akhtar Jahan had executed a Hibanama in his favour with respect to the entire suit lands and had thus transferred the same in his favour. He consequently became the sole owner of the suit lands. He also claimed title to the suit lands by virtue of adverse possession and submitted that the claim is barred by time. He also filed a counter claim for declaration of his title to the suit lands and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession over the same. Respondent No.3 Akhtar Jahan also contested the claim by filing her written statement taking almost the same pleas as taken by the appellant in his written statement.