SONA DEVI Vs. KASHI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Second Appeal filed by the appellant under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 (in short, the Code), the challenge is against the judgment and decree recorded in Title Suit No. 168 of 1982/3 of 1985 by the trial court on 17.8.1985, whereby, the Suit filed by one Kashi Prasad on the basis of a registered sale deed executed by the husband of daughter of defendant No. 1 Jago Devi, claiming declaration of title and confirmation of possession and in the alternative for recovery of possession came to be decreed on appreciation of facts and evidence which came to be affirmed in First Appeal being Title Appeal No. 50 of 1985 decided by 4th Additional District Judge, Biharsharif (Nalanda) on 26.5.1999. The Suit filed by Kashi Prasad as a plaintiff, in short, was based on the fact that Bhola Mahto of village Chandasi Tola Jolahpur had a daughter Jago Devi who was the exclusive owner of the property of her father. Jago Devi has gifted the property to Krishna Devi, her daughter, on 7.9.1971 in respect of 2 acres and 17 decimals. Upon the death of Krishna Devi on 19.4.1974 her husband Sita Ram Prasad alias Sita Prasad sold away the property by a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff Kashi Prasad on 21.11.1981. The said Kashi Prasad-origi-nal plaintiff, filed a Title Suit for the purpose of declaration of his title and confirmation of possession which was contested by original defendant No. 1 Jago Devi, the mother-in-law of Sita Ram alias Sita Prasad, the seller of the property to the plaintiff. The trial court raised issues and upon appreciation and evaluation of evidence on record found the claim of the defendant not maintainable and unsupportable by law. This finding and the ultimate conclusion recorded by the trial court came to be affirmed even on being questioned in the First Appeal, Title Appeal No. 50 of 1985.

(2.) Some of the facts and chronology of events which have material bearing on the adjudication of the dispute on merits may be highlighted at this stage which are as hereunder:

(3.) At the stage of admission, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has addressed this Court on all the points and has, also, in course of submission, supplied the material documents like pleadings, etc. which are examined threadbare. The entire record of this case has been meticulously evaluated and examined. Upon true and correct appraisal and analysis of the evidence, the conclusion reached by the trial court and affirmed by the first appellate court cannot be said to be in any way unjust, unreasonable or perverse requiring interfere of this Court in terms of the provision of Sec. 100 of the Code where the scope of the High Court is very much circumscribed. In order to succeed in a Second Appeal it is to be shown that there is not only a question of law requiring consideration but such a question of law is of substantial nature so that the two elements and characters in substantialness of a question of law are to be satisfied by invocation of powers under Sec. 100 of the Code. Both the characteristics in the present Second Appeal are conspicuously absent.