KESWAR ORAON Vs. BIRIA ORAON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment passed by learned Addl. District Judge, F.T.C.-I., Gumla in connection with Title Appeal No. 16 of 2004 whereby the learned lower appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif, Gumla in connection with Title Suit No. 41 of 1999. The suit by the plaintiff/appellant was brought before the Munsif, Gumla for declaration of title and confirmation of possession over the suit land and if the plaintiff is found dispossessed from the suit land in course of trial, then for recovery of possession through process of the Court. The plaintiff had also prayed that judgment and decree passed in terms of compromise dated 25.6.1996 and 1.7.1996 in Title Suit No. 85 of 1992 be declared illegal, void and not binding upon the plaintiff.

(2.) I have gone through the judgment of trial Court and from para-8, in which issue Nos. 3, 6 and 7 have been decided, the trial Court has clearly observed that a compromise petition in Title Suit No. 85 of 1992 was filed. Petition under Order XXIII, Rule 4 of the C.P.C. in Title Suit No. 85 of 1992 was filed by present appellant Mankeswar Oraon @ Keswar Oraon on 8.12.1993 (Ext.-F). It is not a case that just after filing of the compromise petition and petition under Order XXIII, Rule 4 of the C.P.C. the judgment was pronounced. It is a case in which petition, so filed was supported by affidavit by two of the plaintiffs and the matter was kept pending for about one year and during that period two of the plaintiffs were examined who supported the compromise arrived at between the parties but the plaintiff never raised any objection at any point of time during pendency of Title Suit No. 85 of 1992. It appears that the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court have rightly dealt with the issues framed and therefore, I do not find that any substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal and therefore, the same stands dismissed.