RAMKUMAR MAHETE Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the plaintiff directed against the judgment and decree dated 29th March, 2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Lahar District Bhind in Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2006 confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.1.1996 passed by Civil Judge Class II Lahar in Civil Suit No. 13A of 2004 by which, the suit filed by the plaintiff seeking declaration of title on the basis of adverse possession has been dismissed but the decree for permanent injunction has been granted directing the respondents not to dispossess the plaintiff/appellant without following due process of law.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case in brief was that Survey No. 5604 area 0.408 Hectares is in the possession of the plaintiff since long. It is said that the land in question was cultivated by father since Samvat 2007 and continued in his name and thereafter in the name of the plaintiff. In Samvat 2023, Patwari disturbed the possession without issuing any notice and tried to dispossess the plaintiff forcibly till then, the plaintiff continued in possession for more than 30 years within the knowledge of the State Government. However, he has acquired title on the basis of adverse possession. It is further said that on having long possession on the said land, it may be protected and it cannot be disturbed without following due procedure of law.

(3.) LEARNED courts below after framing issues and taking the evidence on record found that the continuous, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of the plaintiff has not been proved for last 30 years. In absence of the same suit seeking declaration was dismissed while permanent injunction was granted directing the respondents not to disturb possession of the plaintiff without following due procedure of law and the said finding has been affirmed by the appellate Court. Being aggrieved by the same, this appeal has been preferred.