SAGUNA BAI Vs. DHANPRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal under Section 100 C. P. C. presented by the appellant/defendant against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Sagar in favour of the respondent/plaintiff, raises the following substantial question of law:

(2.) THE facts of the case in narrow compass are as follows: The respondent/plaintiff brought a suit for possession, declaration and damages against the appellant/defendant on the allegations that one Munnalal Gupta had taken some piece of land bearing Khasra No. 142 and 143 on rent from the Mohatmimkar of the idol of Shri Deo Janki -Raman Mandir, Madiya Kubule, Vitthal Nagar, Sagar and had raised a hutment over it.

(3.) HOWEVER , in between, Shrimati Bhuri Bai Mohatmimkar of the idol of Shri Deo Janki -Raman Mandir instituted Civil Suit No. 11 -A/67 against the plaintiff/respondent and his vendee for possession of the land over which the said hutment was erected. But, the proceedings of Civil Suit No. 11 -A/67 ended in compromise. According to the terms of the compromise decree dated 2 -2 -68, it was settled between the parties that the land over which the hutment was erected, the title of the land would continue in favour of the idol Suri Deo Janki -Raman Mandir, bat the super structure standing over it, shall be that of the plaintiff and as such the rent of the land alone was fixed at Rs 4/ - per month. By this compromise decree the plaintiff became the owner of the house whereas the land over which the super structure was erected, remained in possession of the trust.