LAWS(PAT)-2001-7-59

RAMKALI DEVI Vs. RAM NARESH PRASAD

Decided On July 27, 2001
Ramkali Devi Appellant
V/S
Ram Naresh Prasad Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal was directed against the judgment and decree passed by Sri Madan Mohan Choudhary, Sub ordinate Judge -I, Aurangabad in Title Appeal No. 32/78/30/84, The appellants before this Court were the defendants in title suit No. 86 of 1969 and the suit was filed by the respondents before this Court. The suit was dismissed and then, on appeal by the plaintiff -respondents, the appellate Court decreed the suit. Hence, this appeal by the defendants of the suit who were the respondents before the first appellate Court.

(2.) BEFORE I refer to the substantial question of law framed for decision of this appeal, it would be worthwhile to refer to certain relevant facts pleaded by the plaintiff -respondents as well as by the defendant -appellants before this Court. Plot Nos. 219 and 220 were the subject -matter of the suit and it was pleaded by the plaintiff -respondents that one Pachkali Kuer was the recorded tenure -holder of the aforesaid plots and one Basudeo Lal, Mathura Prasad and Rajendra Prasad were the grandson from the daughter's side of this Pachkali Kuer. On the death of Pachkali Kuer, her three Natis inherited her properties. Rajendra Prasad had separated from other brothers but Basudeo Lal and Mathura Prasad remained joint. Basudeo Lal had a confident in one Mudrika Prasad who used to pay rent on behalf of Basudeo Lal. This Mudrika Prasad fraudulently obtained receipt for 57 decimals of plot No. 219 and 99 decimals of plot No. 220. Plaintiff No. 2 was father of plaintiff No. 1 and their case was that they had inherited the property from Pachkali Kuer. Basudeo Lal had gifted 1.25 decimals of plot No. 219 in favour of plaintiff No. 1 and the remaining area of this plot and plot No. 220 were all inherited by both the plaintiffs on the death of Basudeo Lal. The plaintiff No. 2 was Madhura Prasad. However, the defendant -appellants were claiming the said land, 7 decimals of plot No. 219 and entire area of plot No. 220 on the basis of settlement from Mathura Prasad and Basudeo Lal in the year 1950 Fasli (corresponding to year 1943).

(3.) THE substantial questions of law, formulated for the decision of this appeal were to the following effect: