RAGHU NATH SINGH Vs. SIABAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8th April, 1987, passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Gopalganj, in Title Appeal No. 60 of 1983/6 of 1986. By the aforesaid judgment the appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiffs of the Title Suit No. 68 of 1971. The trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs. So the appellants lost in both the lower Courts and then they have filed this second appeal.

(2.) I find that in this second appeal, substantial question of law, formulated for decision was "Whether the compromise decree passed in Title Suit No. 82 of 1947 will bind the plaintiffs and Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 irrespective of the fact as to whether the acquisition of the property was not by a registered deed."

(3.) The relevant facts relating to the issue of law formulated by this Court are worth mentioning. The case of the plaintiff - appellants was that one Satya Narayan Singh was the common ancestor of the plaintiffs and Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. Satya Narayan Singh had two sons, namely, Chhabila Singh and Lakshmi Narayan Singh. Lakshmi Narayan Singh was married to one Saraswati Kuer, daughter of Udit Narayan Singh of village Hajiapurin the District of Gopalganj. Satya Narayan Singh who was of Tekari village of Gaya District' purchased certain lands from Udit Narayan Singh orally. So there was a title suit among the descendants of Satya Narayan Singh (T.S. No. 82 of 1947) and in this title suit, the plaintiff -appellants and the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 of the suit were the parties. There was a compromise on the basis of which the suit land fell to the share of plaintiff -appellants. However, Defendant No. 4 of the suit made a registered gift in favour of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 regarding some portion of the suit land and subsequently other defendants of the suit purchased certain lands from Defendant No. 4 as also from Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. Purchasers wanted to disturb the possession of the plaintiff -appellants and so the instant suit under appeal was filed in which the plaintiff -appellants lost throughout.