MANGIDAS Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1997 passed by learned 6th Additional District Judge, Ujjain in Civil Appeal No. 38-A/92 whereby the judgment and decree dated 10.10.1992 passed by learned 5th Civil Judge Class-2, Ujjain in Civil Suit No. 205-A/91 dismissing the suit of plaintiff-appellant has been affirmed, this second appeal has been filed under section 100, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

(2.) IN brief, the suit of plaintiff is that the agricultural land, description whereof has been mentioned in para-1 of the plaint and which is the subject matter of the suit, is situated in village Gunaya, Tahsil Ghatiya, District Ujjain. The suit land has been entered in the name of Mandir Radha Krishna in the revenue record and the temple has been shown to be the Bhumiswami. The plaintiff is in possession of the suit land since the time of his fore-father. According to the plaintiff, the suit land was given by Ex- Rular Sawai Jai Singh Ji to Manohardas Baba who was the fore-father of the plaintiff for agricultural purpose and since then, according to custom of his family, the suit property is being possessed firstly by his fore-father and thereafter he is possessing the same. According to the plaintiff, he is the Bhumiswami having possession of the suit property. On 24.2.1984, the father of plaintiff namely Raghunathdas Ji died and the plaintiff is the sole heir of his father. The family tree has also been annexed to the plaint.

(3.) IT has also been pleaded by plaintiff that arbitrarily without any jurisdiction, the Collector, Ujjain started to give some part of the suit property on lease by auctioning it, therefore, the plaintiff served notice under section 80, CPC on Collector, Ujjain on 23.3.1989 and when no reply of the said notice has been given the present suit has been filed by him praying that in accordance to the heritable right, the plaintiff is entitled to get his name mutated in the revenue record. The entry of the Collector as Vyawasthapak (manager) in the revenue record be deleted and a decree of perpetual injunction be granted in favour of the plaintiff against defendant/State Government that they should not interfere in the possession of the plaintiff.