RAJMAL Vs. ANIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission. This second appeal under Sec. 100 of CPC has been filed by the appellants/plaintiffs being aggrieved by the judgement and decree dtd. 22/02/2019 passed by 23rd Additional District and Session Judge, District-Indore (M.P.) in Civil First Appeal No.25/2016 arising out of the judgment and decree dtd. 13/10/2016 passed by 2nd Civil Judge, Class-II, Depalpur, District-Indore (M.P.) in Civil Suit No.4-A/2015, which was set-aside. Necessary facts for disposal of the case, in short are as under :-

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the appellants/plaintiffs and respondents/defendants No.1 to 7 are the real brothers and sisters. They are the joint owners of agriculture land bearing survey No.25, 31, 94, 101, 124, 175, 189, 264, 289, 302, 326, 389, 428, 494, 496, 528, 529, 573, 703, 743, 744 and 925 admeasuring total rakba 53.20 hectare situated at Village - Aurangpura, Tehsil - Depalpur, District - Indore Earlier they filed a Civil Suit bearing COS No.110-A/2006 before the learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Depalpur, which was decided vide judgment dtd. 23/04/2009 against which an appeal was preferred before 18th Additional District Judge Indore and the same was also decided vide judgment and decree dtd. 02/03/2012.

(3.) The facts of the case which leads to the controversy in the present case is that a partition was taken place between the parties before the Revenue Authorities bearing case No.72-v-27/92-93 decided on 31/07/1995, which was maintained vide order dtd. 23/04/1996. Against the said order, the respondents preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said action the respondents filed a Civil Suit bearing COS No. 11-0A/2006 before the learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Depalpur which was decided vide judgment dtd. 23/04/2009 against which an appeal was preferred before 18th Additional District Judge, Indore and the same was also decided vide judgment and decree dtd. 02/03/2012. After the partition the Survey No.94 was divided as Survey No. 94/2 and the same is the disputed property.