ba, Apgellants Defendémt no. 1 { /. SINGLE BEN£H Shyam Sunder DefendFant no.2 f u‘ K efendant No 3 ‘ QWW W 2/» iv 3 Respondents Plaintiff No.1 z“ [ i l K 1 ‘ \ Plamuff No 2 / S/ o Insharam Lodhi, Aged about 35 Years, R/o V111age Chlchka Occupa‘uon Agrlcultuarist Tehs11 Khmragarh Dist : Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) Sakha Ram @ Radhelal S/o Kaluram Lodhi, Aged about 35 Years Occupatlon Agnculturalst Chandra Kumar S/o Gendlal Lodhi, Aged about 45 years, Occupatlon Agncultunst Appellant / Defendant No 2 85 3 are R/o Vxllage Konay Tehs11 Chmkhadan, Dlst Rajnandgaon- (co) Versus Suxya Vgay Smgh ** S/o Late Shyam Karan Smgh Kshatn Aged about 45 years, Occupatmn Cycle Repalr Shopkeepmg Smt.Anuj Kunwar Bai Widow of Late Shyam Karan singh Kshatri, Aged about 65 years, Both R/o Khairagarh, Dist : Rainandgaon-(C.G.) Niraj Singh ¢ i r \ Defendant No.4b «I; ! 3 ( f efedant No.4c Qn SV/o Chandra Vijay Singh, Aged about 45 years, Dhannu Singh ‘S/ o Chandra Vijay Singh, Aged about 33 years, Respondent / Plamtlff o 3 8s 4 are R/o Vrllage Khmragarh Tehsrl Khalragarh D1st Ramandgaon H v a x 4, Defenqlant‘ No. 10 13. ( / -,_‘_W. -r“._.v - C/o Dig Vijay Singh, R/o Khairagarh , Distth Rajnandgaon(C.'G.)” Ravi Ditya Singh S/o Vijay Karan Singh Kshetriya, Aged abuut 43 years, Occuaption — Service R/o Near Raj Kumar College, Country Liquof Shop, Raipur—(C.G) J3“ (2) Deferldant N0.4d ' 5,, / Sm-t.Nirma1a Singh W/o Rajendra Singh Bais, ' Aged about 40 years, R/ o Bhadgaon Khufd, Dist : Balaghat-(M.P.) Defendant N0.4e. 6. _ Smt.Anjani Singh, > W/o Lakhan Singh, ’ Aged about 36 years, R/ o Dipra Para, Potiya Road, Near Mahesh Charla § l Bafta, Durg'(C.G.) 1 V ‘ ‘Deferxdaht No.4f. 7. Miss.Neeta Singh ;’ / D/o Chandra Vijay Singh, Aged about 38 years, R/o Khairagarh, Turkaripara, hi front of Arjun Sindhi Aara Machine Khairagarh, Dist : Rajnandgaon-(C.G.) Defendant N05. Dig Vijay Singh, - g S/o Devkaran' Singh Kshatriya V g Aged about 46 years, § Occupation a Agriculturalist, ‘ R/o Khairagarh, Dist : 1 Rainandgaon—(C.G.) Defendant No.6 Ari Vijay Singh @ A.&Qhandel, Aged about 45 years, Occupation — Service, i l R/o Qr.No.802, N—2V Sector, i Piplani, Bhopal—(MR) 1 Defend‘ahtNoJ 10, Narendra Vijay Singh ; c‘ Aged about 42 years Defendiarit No.8. i1. Ashwani Vijay Singh j " Aged about 40 years yefendjant No.9 124 Bharat Vijay Singh (33 Sudheer Singh Defendant No. 11 S/o Vijay Karan Singh Kshetriya, Aged about 42 years Liquér Shop, R/o Behsar Tehsil & Dist : Raipur, Post — Tilda Neora-(C.G.) Kishore Kumar Aged about 4O years, ccupation ~ Agriculturalist, SmtSafla Bai Widow of Late Shri Vijay Karari Siogh Kshetirya, Aged about 65 years, Respondent / Defendant No.15 85 16 are R/o Khairagarh, Dist : ‘. § Defendant No.12 Defengi‘axit No. 13 i i 4 Defenbaht N0. 14 1 Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) Hem Kara-n Singh S/o Ragunath Singh Kshetriya Agegi about 55 years, Occupation — Service, R/o Wadwa Chowk, In the House of Lal Vijendra Singh, Bank Marlager, Ward Dengargarh, Tehsil — Khairagafh, Dist z Rag‘naadgaon—(QGJ State of MP. Deferjuiant No.17 L Defeadant No.15 Now State 0f Chhattisgarh, Through Collector Rajnandgaon, Krishna Lata Bai W/o K.V.singh, Aged about 60 years, 1 X i t R/o Through — K.B.P.T.I Teacher, Near Old Bus Stand Dongargarh, Dist : Rajnandgaon—(C.G.} Smt.Pushp1ata Bai W/e L31 Deepak smgh, R/o B:N.C..Mi11s, Ghari Khata, Pehali Para, Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) Defegndafrit No.18 i i i i Aged abaut 53 years Occupation — Service at Country S/ o Vijay Karan Singh Kshetriya, O E (4) Suraj Lata Bai, ' W/o Thakur Chandra Vijay Singh, - Aged about 50 years, R/o N€ar Saraswati Shishu Mandir, Khairagarh, Dist : Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) ant No. 19 Aslata Bai W/o Shyam Kumar Singh, Aged about 45 years, R/o Kurrabhat, Tehsil Khairagarh, Dist ~ Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) .ant No.20 Pumima Singh W/o Lal Chandra Kumar singh R/o Raj Family Khairagarh, Dist : Rajnandgaon—(C.G.) Aged about 48 .years, Smt.Nidhi Singh x D/o Late Vijay Karan Singh, Aged about 42 years, W/Q Lal Mahendra Singh, (Police Station Wireless Set), R/ o Choukhadiya Para Rajnandgaon—(C.G.a)a dant No.22 APPE CTION 104 RZW ORDER 4:’5RULE 1 CODE OF AL UNDER SE ‘ CIVIL PROCEDUREigos Wm V‘ai zoo ' wruu..."..r...>....~.'.~u».; ‘ ’K ' Wm fz€rm ‘ %afaqa1m impugned ordar dafe'd 3/2/2005 on fhe ground ‘Thaf The quésfion ”of hmN‘a‘hon raised m *he su T being a miked queéfiori of fac‘rs ahd‘ law which requures ewdence 'or deaslon and Therefore se'r asade fhe iorder pasged by _C.IVII Juc’ge Class I Khalmgarh and remanded The - case fo detide Theissue Hlmlfa‘hon along wrrh ofher Issues on ‘rhe basis of evidence‘adduce ’by bo‘H‘I The par‘ries Being aggrieved Lby _ 322005 passed m CWII Appeal No 1- ’A/2001 by Addmonal Dls‘r ic‘l’ Judge Khalragarh fhls appeal has been From fhe argumen s advanced'by learned counsel for fhe appellan'rs and fhe facts menhoned m The memo of appeal If Is ’ ’ evuden'l' fha‘r fhe plam‘hff /responderl1's No 1 and 2 filed a surl‘ for y declara‘hon and par'rmon a legmg ‘lhe aliena‘hon da‘l'ed 20/04/197O and a mu‘ra‘hon dafed 17/09/1 75 a resul'l' of fraud Proper'ry bemg ancesfral proper-Ty ‘l'hey cl Imed fhelr share For cause of ac‘hon and r llmrrahon plaln‘hffs 'I’ook helfer of wanl' of knowledge of allena‘hon 'V v Apparenfly, fhe quesflon f llml'ra'hon m The msTanT suIT was a mixed queshon of facTs and laws Therefore when The cause of acTIon arose . gand wheTher The suIT been filed WlThIn llmlfahon boTh These ques‘hons wnThouT recordin ewdence cannoT be decided ‘ h