GAYABAI Vs. SHRIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the plaintiff challenging judgment and decree dated 3 -10 -1996 passed by Addl. District Judge, Mungawali, District Guna in Civil Suit No. 5 -A/93 whereby the Court below has dismissed the suit filed by the appellants for specific performance or in alternative for payment of compensation of Rs. 27,000/ - .

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that village Nanauti was a Zamindari village and Himmatsingh, Gajrajsingh, Hameersingh and Shankarsingh were the Ex -Zamindars of the said village. Land admeasuring to 195 bigha 8 biswa was recorded in the name of Gajrajsingh while 97 bigha and 5 biswa was recorded in the name of Shankarshingh. 49 bigha and 9 biswa was recorded in the name of Hameersingh. Thus, the total land of 342 bigha and 5 biswa was recorded in the name of these persons. According to the plaint allegations this land was Khudkast land and after coming into force of Madhya Bharat Zamindari Abolition Act they continued to be the owner of the land. However, some other persons were in possession of the part of the land and litigation in respect of the said land was pending. On 10 -4 -1981 an agreement was entered into between the plaintiff and defendant whereby the defendant has agreed to sell one fourth of survey No. 106 admeasuring to 0.536 hectares to the plaintiff. The possession of the said land was also handed over to the plaintiff at the time of agreement. It was also agreed that one half portion of survey No. 48 admeasuring to 1.259 hectares shall be sold by the defendant to the plaintiff. The possession of this land was continued with the defendants. It was agreed by the said agreement that the plaintiff will bear the expenses of all the litigations pending in respect of the said land and in case the defendants succeeds in the litigation they will transfer the lands mentioned above to the defendants.

(3.) DEFENDANT filed their written statements denying the allegations made in the plaint. Trial Court on the basis of pleadings framed as many as three issues and ultimately dismissed the suit.