SHASHIKANT PANDEY Vs. FULGENA DEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment dated 12.9.1989 and decree dated 27.9.1989 passed by Shri Ram Prit Pathak, 7th Additional District Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram in Title Appeal no. 37 of 1978/8 of 1989 whereby he was pleased to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment dated 31.7.1978 and decree dated 24.8.1978 passed by Sri Chandeshwar Mochi, 1st Additional Munsif, Sasaram in Title Suit no. 98 of 1970.

(2.) Title Suit no. 98 of 1970 was filed by the plaintiffs praying therein for removal of encroachment over the land fully described in schedule 'A' of the plaint. The parties to the suit amicably settled the matter outside the Court and entered into an agreement. A compromise petition dated 13.9.1977 was filed in the Trial Court. Subsequent thereto an objection to the compromise petition was filed by the plaintiff no.1 stating that the defendants had got the compromise under the state of intoxication of the plaintiff. By order dated 31.7.1978 passed in T.S. no. 98 of 1970 the learned 1st Additional Munsif, Sasaram was pleased to reject the objection and the compromise petition filed by the parties was accepted. A preliminary decree was ordered to be drawn up in terms of the compromise and accordingly the decree dated 24.8.1978 was drawn up. The plaintiff no. 2 preferred T.A. no. 37 of 1978 against the judgment dated 31.7.1978 and decree dated 24.8.1978. By judgment dated 12.9.1989 the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram was pleased to dismiss the appeal in its present form as not maintainable. It is against this judgment dated 12.9.1989 and the decree dated 27.9.1989 that the instant appeal has been preferred under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').

(3.) For the sake of convenience, the parties to the proceedings shall be referred to as per their description in the title suit.