1 - Krishna Kumar S/o Late Jagdev Dewangan, Aged About 52 Years Dhamtari, R/o v. 1 - Basanta Bai
Case Details
Page 1 of 5 2025:CGHC:36773 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SA No. 40 of 2017 1 - Krishna Kumar S/o Late Jagdev Dewangan, Aged About 52 Years Dhamtari, R/o Chhattisgarh ...............Defendant, Chhattisgarh Potiyadih, District Nagri, Tahsil ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Basanta Bai (Died) Through Legal Hers. As Per Honble Court Order Date- 08-08-2019
Legal Reasoning
(A) Santram S/o Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Devangan R/o Village Silghat, P.S.- Bhakhara, Tahsil- Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (B) Ramram S/o Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Devangan R/o Village Silghat, P.S.- Bhakhara, Tahsil- Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (C) Smt. Dulari Bai W/o Shri Kamdev Devangan R/o Village Pandhada, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh (D) Durga W/o Shri Amarpal Devangan R/o Village Semra, P.S. Sihava, Tahsil Nagari District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (E) Mahendra S/o Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Devangan R/o Village Silghat, P.S. Bhakhara, Tahsil Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh (F) Smt. Chandrika Devangan W/o Shri Makhanlal Devangan R/o Village Parsahi P.S. Ramchairai, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh (G) Smt. Nainy Devangan W/o Late Shri Narendra Devangan R/o Village Silghat, P.S.- Bhakhara, Tahsil Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh Page 2 of 5 (H) Smt. Gangotri W/o Shri Kam Devangan R/o Village Bodra, Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2 - Vindhyawasni D/o Late Ramnarayan Dewangan, Aged About 34 Years Potiyadih, Tahsil Nagri, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 3 - Roopchand S/o Late Shree Jagdev Dewangan, Aged About 57 Years Potiyadih, Tahsil Nagri, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 4 - Girja Bai D/o Late Jagdev Dewangan, Aged About 54 Years W/o Amar Singh, R/o Village Belar, Tahsil Nagri, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ishwari Bai D/o Late Jagdev Dewangan, Aged About 47 Years W/o Ramadhar Dewangan, R/o Village- Dindabhatha, Tahsil Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 6 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Collector, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ................Defendants, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Appellant: Mr. D.N. Prajapati and Mr. K.K. Prajapati, Advocates For R1(A, B, D to H) : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. K.L. Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Judgment on Board 29.07.2025 1. By way of instant second appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2016 passed by Additional District Judge, Dhamtari in Civil Appeal No.37-A/2014. By the said judgment the first appellate Court had dismissed the first appeal and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 23.09.2014 passed by the trial Court i.e. First Civil Judge, Class- I, Dhamtari, in Civil Suit No.121-A/2013. Page 3 of 5 2. The instant second appeal was admitted for hearing by order dated 21.06.2019 on the following substantial question of law:- “Whether finding of the Court below refusing to take the additional documentary evidence like two registered deeds of sales, both dated 28.01.1980, executed in favour of Hema Bai by rejecting the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and thereby granting the decree for partition in respect of the property in question bearing Khasra Nos.770/1 & 770/2 described in plaint Schedule (c), is perverse?” 3. However, during the pendency of the second appeal, as per the special mediation drive initiated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for settling the dispute through mediation the matter was placed before the mediation centre of this Court. The parties appeared before the mediation centre of this Court and settled their dispute on the following terms :- “mHk;i{k ds chp fuEufyf[kr 'krksZa ij le>kSrk fd;k tk jgk gS%& mHk; i{kdkj izFke O;ogkj U;k;k/kh’k oxZ 01 /kerjh ds O;ogkj okn Øekad& 121,@2013 vkns’k fnukad 23-09-2014 ds vuqlkj ekuuh; U;k;ky; }kjk txnso jke nsokaxu dh laifRr ij vuqlfp v] l] n] bZ ds vuqlkj izR;sd dks 1@6 fgLlk iznku djus dk vkns’k gqvk gSA ftldk f}rh; vihy ekuuh; mPp U;kk;y; fcykliqj esa d`".kk dqekj ds }kjk fd;k x;k Fkk vihy uacj& 40@2017 i{kdkj d`".kk dqekj fo:) clark ckbZ oxSjg gSA ftlesa vkilh jkthuke mHk; i{k cSB dj r; fd;s ftlds vuqlkj i{kdkj Øekad&01 x.k vius rhuksa cgus i{kdkj Øekad&02 x.k dks fuEukuqlkj ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ds funs’kkuqlkj lHkh i{kdkj lger iw.kZ fo’okl ds lkFk fuEukafdr vkilh caVokjkukek dk fu"iknu vkt fnukad 21-07-2025 dks xokgksa ds le{k fu"ikfnr djrs gSaA ftlds vuqlkj cguksa dks i{kdkj Ø02 x.kksa dks xzke iksfV;kMhg i- g-ua- 27 jk-fu-ea- HkksFkyh rglhy o ftyk /kerjh fLFkr d`f"k Hkwfe fuEukuqlkj nsus dk lgefr O;Dr fd;s gSaA ftlds vuqlkj& clark ckbZ ¼e`r½ ftuds okfjl fot; nsokaaxu firk Lo- larjke nsokaxu fxj/kj yky nsokaxu firk Lo- lrjke nsokaxu jkeyky firk dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu 01- 02- 03- Page 4 of 5 04- egsUnz dqekj firk dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu 05- 06- 07- 08- 09- uSu dqekj ifr Lo- ujsUnz dqekj nsokaxu nqykjh ckbZ firk Lo- dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu nqxkZ firk Lo- dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu pafnzdk ckbZ firk Lo- dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu xaxkS=h ckbZ firk Lo- dUgS¸;kyky nsokaxu lHkh fuoklh xzke fly/kV rglhy Hk[kkjk o ftyk /kerjh [kljk uacj& 774 dk VqdM+k jdck& 0-56 gs- ¼ukpu½ i{kdkj Øekad& 02 fxjtk ckbZ firk Lo- txnso nsokaxu [kljk uacj& 772@1 dk VqdM+k 774 dk VqdM+k 1936 dk VqdM+k jdck& 0-10 gs- ¼26 fMlfey½ 0-08 gs- 0-33 gs- i{kdkj Ø- 02 bZ’ojh ckbZ firk Lo- txnso nsokaxu [kljk uacj& 772@1 dk VqdM+k 774 dk VqdM+k 1936 dk VqdM+k jdck& 0-10 gs- ¼26 fMlfey½ 0-08 gs- 0-33 gs- mijksDr dafMdk mYysf[kr d`f"k Hkwfe gsekckbZ] d`".kk dqekj nsokaxu dh ekrk dh L=h /ku dh Hkwfe ,oa [kljk uacj& 774 jdck& 0-7300 gs- Hkwfe orZeku esa d`".kk dqekj :ipan ,oa fo/;kokfluh jktLo vfHkys[kksa esa ntZ gSA ftlesa ls d`".kk dqekj nsokxau] :ipan nsokaxu rFkk fo/;okfluh dks [kljk uacj& 772@1 dk VqdM+k izR;sd dks 0-10 gs- ¼26 fMlfey½ izR;sd dks izkIr gksxkA rFkk mijksDr rhuksa O;fDr;ksa ds iwoZ ls uke d`f"k Hkwfe esa mYysf[kr gS rFkk og rhuksa ds uke ls ;Fkkor jgsxkA mijksDr i{kdkj Ø01 ,oa x.k bl fyf[kr caVokjk lgefr ds vk/kkj ij vkt fnukad& 21-07-2025 dks iw.kZ lgefr ,oa fo’okl ds lkFk fu"ikfnr fd;k gSA rFkk Hkfo"; esa vkt ds ckn fdlh Hkh i{kdkj ,oa muds okfjlkuksa ds }kjk dksbZ fookn mRiUu djrk gS rks og bl foys[k ds vk/kkj ij 'kqU; ekuk tk;sxkA i{kdkj x.kksa ds }kjk [kkrk la/kkj.k dh izfØ;k o"kkZ _rq Page 5 of 5 lekIr gksus ij fd;k tk,xkA” 4. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the judgment and decree dated 23.09.2014 passed by the trial Court i.e. First Civil Judge, Class-I, Dhamtari, in Civil Suit No.121-A/2013 and affirmed by the Additional District Judge, Dhamtari, in Civil Appeal No.37-A/2014 by the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2016 is modified to the terms agreed between the parties. 5. Accordingly, the second appeal is disposed of in the light of compromise entered into between the parties. 6. A decree be drawn up in accordance with the compromise dated 23.07.2025 in Mediation R.M/822/2025 as has been entered into between the parties. The terms of the compromise be made part of the decree. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2025.07.31 10:46:08 +0530 Deshmukh