Chattisgarh High Court
Sajjan vs Manmohan And Others 56 Wpc/1633/2016 ... on 27 November, 2018
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
SECOND APPEAL No. 27 of 2006
1. Sajjan S/o Late Shri Shyam, aged about 55 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.) ----Appellant/ Defendant No. 1
Versus
1. Manmohan S/o Shri Budhau, aged about 35 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.).....(Plaintiff)
2. Budhau S/o Shri Laxman Kanwar, aged about 58 years, R/o
Village Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)....(Plaintiff)
3. Chain Singh S/o Late Shri Shyam, aged about 53 years, R/o
Village Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
4. Lochan S/o Shri Shivanand, aged about 50 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
5. Sukul S/o Shri Shivanand, aged about 46 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
6. Ghasi S/o Shri Manjhiram, aged about 55 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
7. Somar Say S/o Shri Manjhiram, aged about 53 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
8. Bhajram, S/o Shri Manjhiram, aged about 55 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
9. Tilak S/o Shri Shyam Singh, aged about 35 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
10. Hulsa S/o Shri Manjhiram, aged about 43 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
2
11. Badri S/o Shri Shyam Singh, aged about 43 years, R/o Village
Kalcha, Police Station Lakhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Surguja (C.G.)
12. State of Chhattisgarh through the Collector, Surguja, Ambikapur
(C.G.) --- Respondents/Defendants
For Appellant : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 1 to 11 : None.
For Respondent No.12/State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, PL.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order On Board
27/11/18
1. This is appellant/defendant No.1's second appeal under Section 100 of CPC whereby the First Appellate Court affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiff.
2. Mr. Sushil Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/defendant No.1 would submit that both the Courts below are absolutely unjustified in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff and dismissing the counter claim of the defendants and as such, the appeal involves substantial question of law for determination.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, considered his submissions and went through the records with utmost circumspection.
4. The trial Court has held that the suit property was originally held by Jhapat Kanwar and after his death the property was inherited by his widow Dhodi Bai who executed the Will deed on 12.10.1990 in favour of the plaintiff Manmohan and thereby he became the owner of the suit property after the death of Dhodi Bai. The said finding was affirmed by the First Appellate Court by appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record which is neither perverse nor contrary to record. The counter claim of the defendants has been 3 dismissed by both the Courts below holding that the defendants have failed to establish their title over the suit property which is a finding of fact based on material available on record in which I do not find any perversity or illegality much less for determination of substantial questions of law.
5. Accordingly, the second appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost(s).
SD/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka