AJAY KUMAR MODI Vs. SOMAR MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the plaintiffs -appellant stands directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 13.2.1989 and 23.2.1989 respectively passed in Money Appeal No. 1 of 1986 by Shri Uma Shankar, 1st Additional District Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder the Judgment and decree dated 29.3.1986 and 17.4.1986 passed in Money Suit No. 10 of 1984 by Munsif, Hazaribagh was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.

(2.) THE plaintiffs -appellant had filed the said money suit for realisation of Rs. 1963.75 paisa along with interest @ 12% per annum from the defendants -respondent.

(3.) THE case of the defendants -respondent Nos. 1 to 3, inter alia, is that the land of khata No. 41 stands recorded in the name of their ancestor in the Survey Records of Right and they have right, title, interest and possession thereon and 18 decimals out of plot No. 349 was acquired vide IA Case No. 14 of 1978 -79 and possession in respect thereof was delivered to the CCL and these defendants are in possession over the rest of the land of khata No. 41 and the sale deed dated 25.9.1943 and 13.2.1970 are fictitious sale deeds without consideration and these sale deeds were never acted upon and thus defendants -respondent are still in exclusive cultivating possession of the land of khata No. 41 and the plaintiffs -appellant have never acquitted any right, title and interest in the said land and they are also not in possession over the same. It is further alleged that defendant -appellant Chameli Devi had no right and title and the sale deed dated 15.12.1980 has been created in favour of the plaintiff -appellant Nos. 1 and 2 to make out a case for claiming the compensation amount and the said sale deed is without consideration and has seen in the light of the day after the issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the said Act. The further case of these defendants -respondent is that after proper enquiry and investigation and with the knowledge of the plaintiffs -appellant and their alleged vendors the amount of compensation has been rightly paid to these defendants -respondent.