STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SMT. SEEMA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant civil second appeal under Section 100 CPC has been filed by the defendants-appellants feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 17.12.1996 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No.3, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the first appellate court') in Civil Regular Appeal No.48/1996 whereby the first appellate court has dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants-appellants against the judgment and decree dated 16.2.1994 passed by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Thanagaji, District Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in civil suit No.34/63/92. By the impugned judgment the learned first appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants-appellants on the ground that the appeal was barred by limitation.

(2.) Beifly, stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent Smt. Seema Singh filed a civil suit in the trial court for permanent injunction. It was averred in the plaint that vide order dated 31.1.1992 the Minining Engineer, Alwar allotted a marble mine to the plaintiff comprising of Khasra Nos. 1599, 1696, 1704 and 1705 measuring 100 x 100 meter situated in revenue village Dhani Neejhra, Tehsil Thanagaji, District Alwar. As per the case of the plaintiff after demarcation of the land, she took the possession of the land and has been in continuous possession over the same. It was mentioned that vide order dated 30.10.1992, allotment of the said mine was cancelled and in compliance of the order, the defendants bent upon to dispossess her. Therefore, it was prayed that the order dated 30.10.1992 be declared as null and void and the defendants be restrained from dispossessing her from the land in dispute and not to interfere in the mining work.

(3.) The suit was resisted by defendants Nos. 1 to 6 by filing written statement wherein it was stated that the mining lease issued in favour of the plaintiff was cancelled by the Deputy Secretary, Mines (Gr.2) by his order dated 30.10.1992 and on 9.11.1992 possession of the leased area was taken by the Mining Engineer. It was also submitted that the mining lease of the plaintiff falls in the forest area and before allotment of the mining lease, no-objection certificates from the District Magistrate and Forest Department were required. Order dated 9.11.1992, by which the lease was cancelled is appealable before the Union Government.