POORANPURI Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal by the plaintiffs under Section 100 of CPC is directed against the concurring judgment and decree dated 23/12/2004 passed in Civil Appeal No. 94 -A/2004 by the Additional District Judge, Guna to the Court of First Additional District Judge, Guna, confirming the judgment and decree dated 21/7/2013 passed in Civil Suit No. 1 -A/2001 by Civil Judge, Class - I, Aron. By the impugned judgment, plaintiffs' suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) SUIT property is an agricultural land ad -measuring 2.539 hectare falling in survey No. 682 and 5.957 hectare falling in survey No. 782 having a total area of 8.496 hectare situated in village Rampur, Tahsil Aron, District Guna (hereinafter shall be referred to as "suit land"). Undisputedly, suit land in the revenue documents is recorded as Aukaf Department Maufi Mandir Shri Mahadevji Wanke and Mahant Manpur and Son Hanumant Puri, Guna. The plaintiffs filed a suit on the premise that plaintiffs' father Manpuri was recorded as Pakka Krashak in the revenue records by the order of the Collector dated 23/5/1977 and therefore, by the order of the Collector, the plaintiffs' name have been mutated; however, in the revenue documents transfer has not taken place. It is asserted that suit land since year 1957 -58 has been recorded in the name of plaintiffs' father as Pakka Krashak and thereafter after coming into force the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 w.e.f. 2/10/1959 by force of Section 158 -B, status of plaintiffs of Pakka Krashak changed to Bhoomiswami. It is alleged that respondent /defendant without any notice to plaintiffs has recorded the suit land in the name of Aukaf Department Maufi Mandir Shri Mahadevji Wanke by showing the status of plaintiffs as guardian of the suit land. They made a complaint to the aforesaid effect before the SDO under Section 57 (2) of the MPLRC. The complaint was registered at case No. 2A -1/99 -00. However, the case was dismissed on 18/9/2000. Being, aggrieved thereby, the plaintiffs have filed instant suit seeking declaration that the order passed by SDO be declared null and void with a further direction to revenue authorities to mutate the suit land in the name of plaintiffs and permanent injunction not to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs.

(3.) BY filing written statement, defendant/State denied the plaint allegations. It is submitted that after death of Manpuri by order of the Collector and Tahsildar name of plaintiffs were mutated and in both the orders word Maufi has been mentioned as it has been written since beginning. It is denied that plaintiffs have any right, title or interest over the suit land. On the aforesaid pleadings, prayer for dismissal of the suit was made.