MANJOOR MOHAMMAD Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under section 100 of CPC by the plaintiff is directed against the concurring judgment and decree dated 08/07/2004 passed in civil appeal No. 12A/2004 by III Additional District Judge, Vidisha District Vidisha affirming the judgment and decree dated 13/11/2003 passed in civil suit No. 500A/2003 by Civil Judge, Class -II, Kurwai whereby plaintiff's suit for declaration and permanent injunction as regards suit land has been dismissed.

(2.) SUBJECT -matter of suit relate to an agricultural land falling in survey No. 113/1A area 2.000 out of 6.429 hectare situated in village Adelpur, Tahsil Kurwai, District Vidisha. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction inter alia contending that over the suit land since 1969, he is in possession and enjoying the suit land as its owner and as such 30 years has passed by on the date of filing of the suit and, therefore, acquired title by adverse possession. Accordingly, prayed for the relief as stated above.

(3.) TRIAL Court based upon the aforesaid pleadings had framed issues and allowed parties to lead evidence. Trial Court on critical analysis of the pleadings and the evidence brought on record has dismissed the suit. On appeal, the first appellate Court has again re -appreciated the entire evidence on record and found that there is not a single revenue document/khasra on record to demonstrate that the plaintiff is in possession over the suit land since 1969. As a matter of fact, in some years the plaintiff has been shown as an encroacher and in fact, he has been dispossessed from the suit land. In some years of khasra from 1977 -78 to 2000 -2001, i.e., between the years 1979 -80 and 1988 -89, plaintiff's possession has been shown. In some years of khasra from 1998 to 2000 and 2001, the plaintiff's possession has not been reflected in the revenue record. As such, the entire documentary and oral evidence brought on record did not justify the claim that plaintiff is in continuous, uninterrupted and peaceful possession over the suit land for 30 years as claimed to perfect title by adverse possession. Accordingly, appellate Court affirming the findings of the trial Court as regards right of possession of plaintiff over the suit land has dismissed the suit.