Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 6]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Kanti Prasad Sharma (Died) Th Lrs Smt. ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 August, 2014

                                                                               1



W.P.No.4231/2014
(Kanti Prasad Sharma (Died ) through L.rs., Smt. Shankutala Devi Sharma &
Ors Vs. State of MP & antr)

01­08­2014
         Shri Sanjeev Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.
         Heard. 
         This   petition   under   Article   227   of   the   Constitution   of   India   by 
plaintiffs   is   directed   against   the   order   dated   10/07/2014   passed   by   III 
Civil Judge, Class­I, Gwalior dismissing an application filed by plaintiffs 
under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC. 
         Facts necessary for disposal of this petition in nutshell are to the 

effect that plaintiffs filed a suit on 26/06/1987.  More than 27 years period  has passed.  There is already an order passed by a coordinate Bench of  this Court on earlier occasion directing the trial Court to decide suit within  three months. Plaintiffs have filed the suit  for declaration and permanent  injunction  inter alia  describing the suit land in paragraph 1 of the plaint  situated in Mouja Mehalgaon, Tahsil & District Gwalior. Plaintiffs claimed  that the suit land all along been in possession of their grand­father since  Samvat   2004   (Year   1947),   thereafter   his   successors   and   now   the  plaintiffs. As such, due to long, peaceful and uninterrupted possession,  plaintiffs have acquired title by adverse possession. As defendants have  threatened for forcible dispossession, instant suit is filed.  

Written statement has been field and denied plaint allegations.  Trial Court  has framed issues  and thereafter  plaintiffs  have led  evidence.   At this stage, plaintiffs have filed an application under Order  VII   Rule   14(3)   CPC   to   bring   on   record   certain   documents   relating   to  revenue Court proceedings initiated against the plaintiffs under section  248 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, i.e., removal of  2 W.P.No.4231/2014 (Kanti Prasad Sharma (Died ) through L.rs., Smt. Shankutala Devi Sharma & Ors Vs. State of MP & antr) encroachment,   etc.,     The  trial   Court   addressed   upon   the   jurisdictional  facts as contemplated under  proviso to rule 17 of Order  VI CPC,  i.e.,  whether  the plaintiffs despite due diligence could not file the aforesaid  documents before commencement of trial. The trial Court has found that  since   the   issues   have   been   framed,   plaintiffs'   have   led   evidence,  therefore, in fact and in effect, the trial has commenced.  The trial Court  recorded its satisfaction that the plaintiffs have failed to establish despite  due diligence, documents could not be filed as it is found that explanation  offered   was   devoid   of   substance   as   the   same   is   on  the   premise   that  documents were not within the knowledge of the plaintiff/applicant and  the same were recovered  while he could lay his hands on the old files  kept  in   house.   More   over,   no   averments   are   made   in   the   plaint   with  reference to and in the context of aforesaid documents. As such, the trial  Court held that there is no relevancy of the documents in question. Upon  due consideration of the application on merits and bearing in mind the  the   fact   that   the   suit   is   pending   for   the   last   27   years,   trial   has  commenced   and   the   plaintiffs   have   led   evidence,   dismissed   the  application.

During   the   course   of   arguments,   learned   counsel   for   the  petitioners has relied upon the judgments in the cases of Balwant Kumar  and another Vs. Kailash Behl and another, AIR 2003 Himachal Pradesh  48 and  Cable Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Sanghi Industries  Ltd., AIR 2003 Andhra Pradesh 282.

Upon   perusal   of   the   aforesaid   judgments,   this   Court   is   of   the  opinion that the factual matrix of the case in hand is different and hence,  not helpful to the petitioners.

3 W.P.No.4231/2014

(Kanti Prasad Sharma (Died ) through L.rs., Smt. Shankutala Devi Sharma & Ors Vs. State of MP & antr) Having   gone   through   the   impugned   order   passed   by   the   trial  Court, this Court is of the opinion that the same does not suffer from any  illegality, much less, jurisdictional error.  Order impugned is fully justified  and,   hence,   no   interference   is   called   for.   Petition   sans   merit   and   is  accordingly dismissed. 

Certified copy as per rules.

                                                                       (Rohit Arya)                                         Judge  b/­