RAM PRASAD Vs. HARISHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 20.7.2001 passed by Additional District Judge, Gadarwara District Narsinghpur in Civil Appeal No, 17-A/1986 thereby setting aside judgment passed by trial Court decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellants.

(2.) ORIGINAL plantiff Ram Prasad instituted a suit in the Court of Civil Judge Class II Gadarwara for declaration of title and permanent injunction with respect to agricultural land comprised in survey No. 238/3 and 238/4 on the strength of sale deed dated 22.6.1989 executed by Hari Shankar in his favour. The plaintiff was cultivating the land along with Shashikant Mishra so that defendants do not take illegal possession. They were trying to take forcible possession, hence it became necessary to file the suit for declaration of title and permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from interfering in his possession.

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit aggrieved thereby an appeal was preferred by the defendants. The appeal has been allowed as per impugned judgment and decree. The appellate Court has held that in view of the provision of MP. Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Dharakon Ke Udhar Dene WalonKe Bhumi Hadapne Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (Act 3 of 1977). The question whether it was a prohibited transaction of loan could not have been decided by civil Court in view of the provisions of Act 3 of 1977. Thus setting aside the judgment and decree case has been remitted to the trial Court, the parties have to obtain the decision on the question from the SDO and thereafter the trial Court to proceed further with the suit in the light of decision. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the appellate Court this Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred.