SATYANARAYAN AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by the appellants/plaintiffs being aggrieved by the order dated 3. 3. 2007 passed by the District Judge, satna in Civil Original Suit No. 5-A/07, whereby their application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of CPC restraining the respondent from making any construction on the disputed land has been dismissed.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the appellant filed a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction along with an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of cpc contending that the land situated at village Kolgawan, Satna bearing survey No. 257/1-B/3 area 0. 25 and survey No. 257/1-B/4 area 0. 25 were bought by their predecessor Meman Chandra agrawal, from its earlier Bhumi-swami Yadunath Prasad and saraswat Prasad through registered sale deeds dated 20. 3. 1989 and 13. 7. 1990 respectively. The earlier survey number was mutated in the name of the appellants while the later was mutated in the name of meman Chandra Agrawal. The same was got diverted. On demise of said meman Chandra Agrawal, they inherited his land as bhumiswami. The same was demarcated at the instance of the appellants on 8. 10. 97 and its report was approved by the Tehsildar raghurajnagar. Subsequent to it, on first July, 1999, the fencing of such land was being carried-out by the respondents, the same was objected by them before the Tehsildar. In response of it, on behalf of respondent No. 2, it was stated that such fencing is not being carried-out by it. Thereafter again at the instance of respondent No. 2 some digging work was being carried out on 20. 4. 07. On resisting, the appellant No. 4 was misbehaved by the officials of respondents, on which the aforesaid suit along with the application for issuing ad-interim injunction was filed.

(3.) IN reply of the respondents by denying the aforesaid averments, it was stated that the land bearing survey No. 255/2, 257/2, 258,299,675, 257 (A) total area 8. 59 acres bounded three sides by road while school building the fourth side is belonging to the State respondent No. 1. It was never remained the property of the appellants. It being the play ground of the school was bounded by the wire fencing. The same was being replaced by constructing the wall with the permission of respondent No. 1. The respondents or its official did not have any inimical relation with the appellants. The educational institution of respondents is functioning there since 1953. The appellants with intention to snatch the property of the respondents filed the suit and application on the basis of false and fabricated documents. With these averments the prayer for dismissal of the application is made.