LAXMI DEVI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by plaintiffs is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21/4/2004 in Civil Appeal No. 53-A/2012 confirming the judgment and decree dated 31/10/2012 in Civil Suit No. 14-A/2011. Plaintiffs' suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) Plaintiffs filed a suit inter alia contending that the suit plot admeasuring 125X125 sq. ft. is part of survey No. 239/2 Rakba 0.721 hectare situated in village Krishnaganj, Tahsil Pohari, District Shivpuri. The aforesaid land as per the order of Tahsildar, Pohari dated 31/7/1963 in case No. 1/62-63X113 was found to be of Bhoomiswami rights of Adarsh Seva Sangh and accordingly, the revenue records were corrected. Thereafter, Adarsh Seva Sangh, Pohari by its resolution No. 13 dated 8/9/1979 had transferred the aforesaid land to the father of plaintiffs. As such, during the lifetime of plaintiffs' father and after his death the aforesaid land has all along been in possession of plaintiffs. A civil suit No. 1A/1987 was also filed by plaintiffs' father during his lifetime against defendants for permanent injunction. The same was decreed. Appeal filed therefrom was also dismissed. As such, since 1979 plaintiffs are in uninterrupted, peaceful and continuous possession over the suit land hostile to the defendants. As such, plaintiffs have acquired title by adverse possession in the year 2009. With the aforesaid pleadings, plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants.

(3.) Defendants no. 1 and 2 did not file any written statement. Defendant no. 3 filed written statement and denied the plaint allegations to the effect that the suit land is of its ownership. It is denied that in the year 1979 the suit land was transferred to father of plaintiffs or plaintiffs are in possession thereof. As a matter of fact against the decree passed in civil suit No. 1A/1987 appeal is still pending under consideration before the High Court, Bench Gwalior, hence, claim of plaintiffs as regards acquisition of title by adverse possession is based on incorrect premises and plaintiffs under such circumstances do not deserve any relief as claimed and suit deserves to be dismissed.