MAHAVEER SINGH Vs. JANKI ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30/6/2008 in Civil Appeal No. 57 -A/2007 confirming the judgment and decree dated 29/6/2007 in Civil Suit No. 19 -A/2006. Plaintiff's suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) PLAINTIFF filed a suit inter alia contending that the suit land falling in survey nos. 156, 160, 170 and 171 situated in village Banskhedi, Tahsil and District Shivpuri is in peaceful, continuous and uninterrupted possession of the plaintiff for last 15 years with Bhoomiswami rights, therefore, he has perfected title by adverse possession. Defendant no. 1 claiming to have purchased the suit land in the year 2001 from one Bhushanlal since threatened the plaintiff of forcible dispossession, plaintiff filed the instant suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

(3.) THE trial court on the respective pleadings of the parties framed issues and allowed the parties to lead evidence. Trial Court upon critical evaluation of the evidence on record, dismissed the suit having held that the plaintiff failed to establish his continuous, peaceful, uninterrupted possession over the suit land for last more than 12 years hostile to the defendants. On appeal, the first appellate court has re -appreciated the entire evidence on record. It is found that Sardar Singh is the uncle of appellant/plaintiff Mahavir Singh. Sardar Singh had earlier filed a civil suit No. 15 -A/2005 claiming perfection of title by adverse possession over the suit land falling in survey nos. 156, 160, 170 and 171 in village Banskhedi, District Shivpuri. The same was dismissed by the trial court on 15/7/2005 and the appeal arising therefrom was also dismissed on 21/10/2005. Therefore, the first appellate court further observed that the instant suit has been filed by Mahavir Singh nephew of Sardar Singh for the same relief on the same averments. As such, it was found that in fact the instant suit was filed in collusion with Sardar Singh, which stood dismissed on 29/6/2007. While adverting to the documentary evidence on record, the first appellate court has found that there is no Khasra Panchshala entries or documents to support the assertion of plaintiff to be in continuous possession of the suit land for last 15 years. As such, the claim of plaintiff as regards peaceful, continuous, uninterrupted possession and perfection of title by adverse possession has been negated for want of evidence in that behalf and the findings of the trial court were confirmed. Accordingly, dismissed the appeal.