DILBAGH SINGH Vs. UMED SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM Nos.11861-C of 2011 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of 170 days delay in refilling the RSA. For the reasons stated in the application which is duly supported by affidavit of appellant itself, the same is allowed and delay of 170 days in refiling the present second appeal is hereby condoned.

(2.) In brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs had filed the present case by alleging that defendants/respondents got some papers signed by them by way of fraud although the papers were thought to be signed for partition. However, later on they got to know that a judgment and decree dated 20.12.1982 was passed against them on the said basis. It is the said judgment and decree that has been challenged by the plaintiffs by filing the present suit and it was further stated by plaintiffs that they are still in possession of the property but the defendants are trying to interfere in their peaceful possession.

(3.) Upon notice, the suit was resisted by defendant nos.1 to 6 by filing a joint written statement, whereby it was stated that the challenge to the impugned judgment and decree dated 20.12.1982 is barred by limitation. Defendants also took the plea of perfecting their title over the suit property by way of adverse possession after passing the judgment and decree dated 20.12.1982. Possession of the plaintiff was denied and it was stated that it is the defendant nos.1 to 6 who are in possession of the property.