9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1898X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suit and granting declaration of ownership in his favour in relation to the suit land. In other words, the High Court was of the view that it was obligatory upon the Appellant (plaintiff) to prove his title by examining his vendor and since it was not done, the decree passed by the Trial Court in Plaintiff s favour was not legally sustainable. This finding of the High Court resulted in dismissal of the appeal and the suit as well. Assuming that the High Court was right in its view, it should have given an opportunity to the Appellant to prove his title by allowing him to adduce proper evidence in support of his case and for that, the High Court should have remanded the case to the Trial Court for retrial of the suit. It was more so because ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. This appeal is filed by Plaintiff No. 1 against the judgment and final order dated 24.01.2005 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench at Gwalior in First Appeal No. 3 of 1998 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal and, in consequence, dismissed the Plaintiff's suit which was partly decreed by the Trial Court. 2. We herein set out the facts, in brief, to appreciate the issues involved in this appeal. 3. The Appellant is Plaintiff No. 1 whereas the Respondents are the Defendants in a suit out of which this appeal arises. 4. The case of the Appellant is that the land bearing Survey No. 899 measuring 18 Biswas situated at Apaganj Mama Ka Bazar Lashkar Gwalior, M.P. was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mother and of the proposed land situated near Surya Narain Temple. A report was, accordingly, received assessing the value of the land of the Appellant at the rate of Rs. 150/- per sq. meter. So far as the land situated near Surya Narain temple was concerned, it was assessed as Rs. 800/- per sq. meter. Letters were also addressed by the Collector and Legal Aid in this regard. 9. Dissatisfied with the action of the Respondents, the Appellant and her mother filed a petition being W.P.(MP No. 290/1989 before the High Court. It was disposed of by the High Court on 22.06.1989 directing the Municipal Corporation to remove latrines, sewer lines, septic tank constructed on the land shown in Appendix 'A'. As no action was taken, the second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the suit and filed written statements. 12. The Trial Court framed nine issues. Parties adduced evidence. 13. Vide judgment dated 29.11.1997, the Trial Court partly decreed the suit filed by the Appellant. It was held that the Appellant-plaintiffs are the owners of the land in dispute, on which trespass was committed by constructing temple, Dargah, latrines and others by the Respondents. It was held that the Appellant is entitled to get the encroachments removed from the land in suit. It was also held that the Government should acquire the land and pay the market value of the land to the Appellant because the land was being used for public purpose. 14. Against that part of the judgment of the Trial Court which resulted in rejection of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting declaration of ownership in his favour in relation to the suit land. In other words, the High Court was of the view that it was obligatory upon the Appellant (plaintiff) to prove his title by examining his vendor and since it was not done, the decree passed by the Trial Court in Plaintiff's favour was not legally sustainable. This finding of the High Court, as mentioned above, resulted in dismissal of the appeal and the suit as well. 20. In our considered opinion, assuming that the High Court was right in its view, it should have given an opportunity to the Appellant to prove his title by allowing him to adduce proper evidence in support of his case and for that, the High Court should have remanded the case to the Trial Court for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordingly granted liberty to amend their pleadings and adduce additional evidence. The Trial Court shall then pass a judgment in accordance with law uninfluenced by any of our observations and of the High Court. 25. Parties to appear before the concerned Trial Court on 27.03.2017 to enable the Court to conclude the proceedings preferably within six months from the date of party's appearance. 26. Before parting with the case, we consider it apposite to bring to the notice of Trial Court the provisions of Order 27 Rule 5B of the Code of Civil Procedure which reads as under. 5B. Duty of court in suits against the government or a public officer to assist in arriving at a settlement.-(1) In every suit or proceeding to which the governm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
