MUNGA LAL GUPTA Vs. HUSSAINI MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant three appeals arise out of common Title Suit No. 42 of 1998 instituted by Munga Lal Gupta, the plaintiff against Gopal Chandra Verma and other defendants for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land described in Schedule A attached at the foot of the plaint and also a declaration to the effect that the defendants have no right, title and interest in the suit property. The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff, against the contesting defendants by Sub Judge I, Garhwa vide judgment and decree dated 29th April, 2008.

(2.) THE trial court framed as many as seven issues. Issue Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 were decided together while decreeing the suit. The three appeals were preferred against the said judgment -Title Appeal No. 11 of 2008 preferred by the appellants Hussaini Mahto, Baldeo Mahto and Ram Gahan Mahto; Title Appeal No. 12 of 2008 by Gopal Chandra Verma, Jay Prakash Narayan, Sudhir Kumar Verma and Praduman Verma and Title Appeal No. 13 of 2008 by Anil Kumar Sinha. The three appeals were clubbed together and decided in common judgment by the District Judge, Garhwa vide judgment dated 25th August, 2009 and the decree dated 1st September, 2009. The three appeals have been preferred by the respective appellants which are once again being decided simultaneously by this judgment.

(3.) THE appellate court was of the opinion that the trial court was in error while adjudicating all the issues together, whereas, in a declaratory suit, the question of title as well as other connected issues have to be gone into separately and meticulously and the sale deed which was the basis of the plaintiffs claim should have been examined in its proper perspective so that to substantiate that the vendor of the sale deed had title to execute the sale deed in favour of the vendee which is the foundation stone of the entire plaint case and chain of title should have been complete,therefore, the judgment of the trial court was set aside and the case was remanded to the trial court to pass a fresh judgment in accordance with law on the individual issues referred in the judgment of the appellate court.