MATU Vs. DHANSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal filed u/S. 100 C.P.C. assails the concurrent findings of both the courts-below, dismissing the suit filed by the appellants/plaintiffs seeking decree of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the agricultural land bearing survey no. 519 area 355 hectare and survey no. 520 area 0.261 hectare (new survey no. 304 area 0.62 hectare situated in village Mauja Nisar, Tehsil Lahar District Bhind (M.P.).

(2.) Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants primarily submits that no reason is assigned by the courts-below for rejecting the suit as time barred. It is further submitted that even on merits the decision of the courts-below suffers from palpable error as name of both the rival parties was mentioned in the Revenue Record and therefore it was not open for the courts-below to have taken a view in favour of only one (defendants). It is also submitted that the application u/O 41 Rule 27 CPC was wrongly rejected by the courts-below by holding that the documents sought to be brought on record were not germane to the issue involved. Therefore, it is submitted that substantial question of law as enumerated at page 7 of the memo of second appeal arises for consideration.