-^ fc ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT BILASPUR S.A. No. 5'^y /2oo6 SinflI&Bench Appellants Defendants Respondents Plaintiffs ^ 1) Heera S/o. Late Mangal aged about 65 years, (Dead and his heirs) 1-A) Butai Ram S/o. late Heera, aged about 39 years, Caste Uraon : 2) Tulsi S/o. Late Mangal aged about 60 years (Dead and his heirs) :2-^) Rambhagat Ram, S/o. late Tulsi Ram aged about 45 years, Caste Uraon. :2^B) Rajkumar, S/o. late Tulsi Ram aged about 36 years, Caste- Uraon, AA1 residents of Village Tatapani, Tahsil Pal District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS :1) Sohrai S/o. Jhari aged about 45 years, ^tS^ -.^lo <^ -,- / :2) Sukhdeo S/o. Hari aged about ^' '"" • € 43 years. Both respondents 1 and 2 are Residents of Village Vishrampur, TahsU Garhwa, District Garhwa (Bihar). : 3) M.P. Governnient through ^" Collector Ainbikapur District Surguja (Now Chhattisgarh) SECOND APPEAL UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE -l^T TT^< ^70 ^ t^^ XI-HC-78 ^^ ^Nld^, ^Tn^J|?, ^crlKiy r.^^., •^sw) »m^TT?h*1|cb ^[ 200^ 3TI^T q^9? (yii^c^T) 3T^T^T^ c^TTW^T^TT^ ^<TT^K^rf?cT3T1^T 14/12/2006 Smt. Hamida Siddiqui, coun| Shri Bhupendra Singh, cour|sel for Heard on admission. Appellants/defendants hav4 aggrieved by the judgment and de<t?! Additional District Judge (F.T.C.),| Appeal No. 6-A/2005 affirming the suit property mentioned in Schedple-A Class-11, Ramanujganj dated 19.8/ Brief facts are that Jhari ai| sun/ey settiement in Sarguja StateJ The suit iand was recorded jointll State. Thereafter, the suit land Jhari and Mangal in Khasra Thereafter, some disputes arose g|i peace. The respondents/plaintiffs on the ground that the suit Mangal. The defendants/appellant^ the suit property is the self acquirejd of oral as well as documentary] Ramanujganj held that the suit Mangal and the decreed the suit foi| District Judge, Ramanujganj affirm< Civil Judge, Class-11, Ramanujganj <=hHfd41^ wraf ^f tel^'<f^^i< ^3:rf^T3T[^?T >el for the appellants. respondents. preferred this Second Appeal being ;ree dated 21.7.2006 passed by the 2nd Ramanujganj District Sarguja in Civii udgment and decree for partition of the to the piaint by the Civi! Judge, 997, in Civil Suit No. 21-A/1992. id Mangal were brothers. Before the |they came to settle at village Tatapani. ^ in the sur/ey settiement of Sarguja w^is also recorded in joint possession of panchjsala from the year 1973-74 to1978-79. |iving rise to proceedings for breach of |!ed the suit for partition of suit property pro^erty was joint property of Jhari and t^ contested the suit on the ground that property of Mangal. On appreciation evidence, the Civil Judge, Class-ii, pr(3perty was joint property of Jhari and partition. In appeai, the 2nd Additional 4d the findings recorded by the iearned ^nd dismissed the appeal. XI-HC-78 3^'^rpn^ra", yTO^^i<?, f^idiy^ S. A-» /^o -3,3-^ ^144€ytl 9hH[^ ^ 200^ w^T^rf^rr^ c[§TT3TT^T$h^Jch I.-.- V Kvr ff< <" l^.few 3TT^?T Ira^7 (^rf^^T) ^cciTW^f5cT3T1^T ~ ^ ^lfe^ WRft'^'[^ <^|^|< ^3Tf^T3TT^r in view of the fact that thje suit property was recorded as joint property as early as at the time o1 and continued to be recorded in Khasra Panchsala of 1973-74 anq the survey settlement in Sarguja State oint possession of Jhari and Mangal in 1978-79, a presumption arose that the suit property was joint property |and in this view of the ,matter, heavy burden was on the defendants/a((>pellants to prove that the suit property was the self acquired property of Mangal. Both the Courts beiow on a proper appreciation of oral as well prove that the suit property wa^ which is a finding of fact. In this view of the matter, finding recorded by both the appreciation of oral as well as d| as documentary evidence have come to the conclusion that the defenda|its/appellants have miserably failed to the self acquired property of Manga! am of the considered oplnion that the Courts below is based on a proper )cumentary evidence and no substantial question of law arises for detern|iination in this appeal. As a result, this Second Appeal is dismissed atth In view of the above, M stands dismissed. No order as td costs. i e stage of admission. (C).P. No. 1439/2006 for grant of stay Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge P.T.O.