Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 77 Years Address 129/ v. 1 - Suresh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 67 Years
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2025:CGHC:27915 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 168 of 2025 Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 77 Years Address 129/ C, Karl Marx Sarani, Khiddirpore, Kolkata 700023 (West Bengal). --- Petitioner versus 1 - Suresh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 67 Years R/o Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Pushpa Saraf W/o Prem Kumar Saraf Aged About 74 Years R/o 52 J, Hazra Road, Kolkata 700019 (W.B.). 3 - Pradip Kumar Kejriwal S/o Late Manohar Lal Kejriwal R/o 19 B, James Long Sarini, Kolkata 38 (Wb), Presently R/o Subhash Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 4 - Spectrum Infotech Private Limited Through Director Bharat Agarwal, S/o Vijay Agrawal, Aged 40 Years, R/o Chakradharnagar Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 5 - Indrapal Singh Bhatiya S/o Harbansh Singh Bhatiya R/o Jagatpur, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 6 - Sunil Agarwal S/o Ramdas Agarwal R/o Friends Colony, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 7 - Punam Chand Agarwal S/o Late Lal Chand Agarwal R/o Gandhi Ganj, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 Chhattisgarh. 8 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh, --- Respondent(s) 496001 Chhattisgarh. 2 with WP227 No. 169 of 2025 Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 77 Years Address- 129/c, Karl Marx Sarani, Khiddirpore, Kolkata- 700023 (West Bengal)(Defendant No. 1). ---Petitioner Versus 1 - Suresh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 67 Years R/o Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.) (Plaintiff) 2 - Smt. Pushpa Saraf W/o Prem Kumar Saraf R/o 52j Hazra Road, Kolkata 700019 (W.B.) 3 - Pradip Kumar Kejriwal S/o Late Manohar Lal Kejriwal R/o 19b, James Long Sarini, Kolkata 38 (Wb), Presently R/o Subhash Chowk, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.) 4 - Spectrum Infotech Private Limited, Through Director Bharat Agarwal, S/o Vijay Agarwal R/o Chakradharnagar Chowk, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.) 5 - Indrapal Singh Bhatiya S/o Harbansh Singh Bhatiya R/o Jagatpur, Raigarh, District Raigarh, 496001 6 - Sunil Agarwal S/o Ramdas Agarwal R/o Friends Colony, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.) 7 - Punam Chand Agarwal S/o Late Lal Chand Agarwal R/o Gandhi Ganj, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.) 8 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Raigarh, District- Raigarh, 496001 (C.G.). --- Respondent(s) 3 with WP227 No. 302 of 2025
Legal Reasoning
25. He lastly contends that it is well settled that issues arise from material propositions of law or fact affirmed by one party and denied by the other, and each such proposition shall form a distinct issue. Hence, the rejection of the said application defeats the very objective of a fair trial and the determination of the real controversy involved in the suit. It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the application be allowed. 26. On the other hand, Mr. Suresh Kumar Jagatramka, respondent No.1 (appearing in person) would submit that all the facts pertaining to previous litigation and orders/judgments have been disclosed in the plaint. He would further submit that in the written statement, defendant No.1 has stated that the plaintiff had filed a Civil Suit No. 267A/1989; MJC No.10/1997 (later registered as Civil Suit No.5A/2017). It is further stated pleaded that the plaintiff was aware of the execution of the sale deeds and this fact is evident from the pleadings made in the MJC No.10/1997. It is also submitted that earlier Civil Suit No. A/116/2011 filed by the plaintiff challenging the sale deeds was dismissed vide judgment dated 06.01.2017. First Appeal No. 274/2017 was preferred before the High Court and it was also dismissed vide judgment dated 18.09.2019. The defendant No.1 has also pleaded in paragraph 7 that an unregistered civil suit filed by the plaintiff in 2020 and it was dismissed on 15.01.2020, and against that order, WP(C)227 No. 142/2020 was filed. 27. In para-9, the defendant No.1 pleaded that the plaintiff also filed Review Petition No. 228/2019, and in that matter contempt proceedings were initiated against him; thus, he pray for the dismissal of the present writ petition. 9 28. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 29. The learned Trial Court has already framed Issue No.7 on 27.10.2023, which reads as follows:- “Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 11 of the CPC?” 30.The grounds relating to the previous litigation and the effect of the earlier orders/judgments can appropriately be raised and adjudicated by the learned Trial Court while deciding Issue No.7. Therefore, the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the application for framing additional
Arguments
Suresh Kumar Jagatramka (In Person) S/o Late Shri Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 66 Years R/o Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner versus 1 - Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka S/o Late Shri Banwari Lal Jagatramka Aged About 72 Years R/o Kolkata At Present R/o Station Road, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Pushpa Saraf W/o Prem Kumar Saraf Aged About 68 Years R/o 3/ A Siddheswari Road Kolkata 29 At Present R/o Station Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pradip Kejriwal S/o Late Manohar Lal Kejriwal Aged About 55 Years R/o 19 - B James Long Sarani Kolkata - 38, At Present Subhash Chowk Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 4 - Specturum Infonent Pvt. Ltd. Director Bharat Agrawal S/o Vijay Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 5 - Indrapal Singh Bhatiya S/o Hervansh Singh Bhatiya Business Vyapar R/o Jagatpur Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 6 - Sunil Agrawal S/o Ramdas Agrawal Business - Vyapar R/o Friends Colony, Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 7 - Ponamchand Agrawal S/o Late Lalchand Agrawal Business, Vyapar, R/o Gandhi Ganj, Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 8 - State Of Chhattisgarh By The District Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh, --- Respondent(s) Chhattisgarh. For Petitioner in WP227 No.168 of 2025 & WP227 No.169 of 2025 For Petitioner in WP227 No.302 of 2025 : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate : Mr. Suresh Kumar Jagatramka, Petitioner in person For respective Respondents : Mr. Suresh Kumar Jagatramka, in person, Mr. Devendra Patel, Advocate with Mr. Harshmandar Rastogi, Adv., Mr. Vineet Pandey, Advocate, Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Deputy Government Advocate, 4 Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/06/2025 1. In WP227 No.168 of 2025, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the learned IIIrd District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No.A/8/2021, whereby the application filed by defendant No.1 under Order 14 Rule 5(2) of the CPC has been rejected. 2. The facts of the present case are that the plaintiff filed Civil Suit No.A/08/2021 seeking declaration that three registered sale deeds bearing Nos. 9694/1987, 9695/1987 &11179/1988 are null and void on the ground that they do not bear the signature of late Smt. Prakashwati Devi. It is also pleaded that the conveyances do not bear the signatures of the attesting witnesses. 3. The plaintiff further sought the relief of injunction. It was pleaded that the suit property includes Plot No.3/1 (new Nos. 3/1, 3/4, and 3/5), admeasuring 10705 sq. ft., House No.38 (old No. 5/10 to 5/17), situated at Gandhi Chowk, Raigarh, along with five shops. 4. The plaintiff stated that the grandfather of the plaintiff, Basant Lal Jagatramka, had purchased the property in the year 1944 and in the year 1953, the entire property was gifted to the mother of the plaintiff, namely Smt. Prakashwati. 5. The plaintiff also pleaded that the residential house and one shop were handed over to him by his mother on 11.03.1979. The possession of Shop No.5/13 was handed over on 27.03.1989. 6. The plaintiff also pleaded that his mother had filed Civil Suit No.37A/1978 for possession of Shop No.5/13, and a decree was passed 5 in her favour by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 01.11.1989. 7. It is further stated that in 1987 and 1988 without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff, his elder brother and sister, namely Mahesh Kumar Jagatramka and Smt. Pushpa Saraf, executed three forged sale deeds dated 18.09.1987 and 10.11.1988 pertaining to Sheet No.44, Plot No.3/1, admeasuring 10705 sq. ft. These documents were allegedly typed in English and executed in the State of West Bengal prior to the judgment in Special Leave to Appeal No.7518 of 1988 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 8. It is also pleaded that Smt. Prakashwati Devi Jagatramka never visited West Bengal and the alleged sale deeds were fraudulently executed through a power of attorney holder, who did not even sign the conveyances. After her death in 1994–95, the elder brother and sister of the plaintiff got the property mutated in their names and started disputing the plaintiff's rights. 9. Civil Suit No.5A/2017 was filed by the plaintiff on 03.03.1997. During its pendency, the elder siblings of the plaintiff sold 8305 sq. ft. of land to respondents No.3 & 4 and 2400 sq. ft. to respondents No.4 to 7. 10. Defendant No.1 filed a written statement and alleged the suppression of material facts relating to the earlier suits and judgments. It has been stated that the plaintiff has not approached the Court with clean hands. 11. Defendant No.1 further contended that the suit suffers from non-joinder of necessary parties and is barred by limitation. It is also pleaded that since the sale deeds were executed in 1987–88 but the civil suit was filed on 15.05.2020, thus the claim was barred by limitation. Defendant No.1 denied the averments made in the plaint. 12. The learned Trial Court initially framed 10 issues on 27.10.2023. Subsequently, three additional issues were framed vide order dated 19.12.2023. 6 13. One of the issues (Issue No.12) framed by the learned Trial Court states whether the plaintiff has perfected his right on account of continuous possession since 11.03.1979 over the suit house and from 27.03.1989 over Shop No.5/13. 14. Defendant No.1 filed an application under Order 14 Rule 5(2) of the CPC seeking a prayer to delete issue No.12, on the ground that the plaintiff has not pleaded adverse possession or has not sought any relief based on it, and such an issue would prejudice the rights of Defendant No.1. 15. The learned Trial Court rejected the application vide order dated 03.12.2024, holding that the plaintiff has pleaded possession over the property in paragraph 2 of the plaint. 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per Order 14 Rule 5(2) CPC, the Court has the power to amend or strike out any issue which appears to be wrongly framed. It is also argued that the plaintiff has neither pleaded adverse possession nor claimed relief on that basis. Therefore, he cannot be permitted to lead evidence to claim title on the basis of possession. 17. On the other hand, Mr. Suresh Jagatramka would oppose the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the plaintiff had pleaded uninterrupted possession since 1979 and 1989 and has thus perfected his title by way of possession. He contended that since the fact of possession has been pleaded in paragraph 2 of the plaint and the same has been denied by defendant No.1 in the written statement, the Trial Court rightly framed Issue No.12. 18. I have heard learned both parties and perused the record. 19. In paragraph 2 of the plaint, the plaintiff has merely stated that he has been in possession of the suit house since 1979 and of Shop No.5/13 since 1989, on the basis of a transfer made by his mother. Defendant No.1 has taken a plea that the plaintiff is in possession as a licensee. 7 However, in the relief clause, the plaintiff has not claimed the title or ownership on the basis of possession. In the plaint, the plaintiff has challenged the registered sale deeds. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, there was no occasion for the Trial Court to frame issue No. 12 regarding the perfection of the title on the basis of continuous possession. The application filed by defendant No.1 under Order 14 Rule 5(2) CPC ought to have been allowed. 20. Consequently, the petition (WP227 No.168 of 2025) is allowed. The application filed by defendant No.1 under Order 14 Rule 5(2) CPC is hereby allowed, and Issue No.12 is struck off from the list of issues. The order passed by the learned Trial Court in this regard is hereby set aside. 21. WP227 No. 169 of 2025:- 22. Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order dated 03.12.2024, passed by the learned III rd Additional District Judge, Raigarh (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. A/8/2021, whereby the petitioner’s application under Order 14 Rule 5(1) read with Section 151 CPC was rejected, is perverse and has resulted in a grave miscarriage of justice. He would further submit that the learned Trial Court has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by law and has passed a non-speaking order without assigning any cogent reason. 23. It is also submitted that under Order 14 Rule 5(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court has the power to amend or frame additional issues at any stage before the passing of a decree in order to determine the real controversy between the parties. 24.It is further contended that in the present case, defendant No.1/petitioner has specifically pleaded in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8 of the written statement that the plaintiff has suppressed material facts including previous orders/judgments and decrees related to the suit property, which amounts to fraud. It is a settled principle of law that 8 fraud vitiates everything, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the learned Trial Court ought to have framed an appropriate additional issue as prayed in the application.
Decision
issue as prayed. Accordingly, the writ petition (WP227 No.169 of 2025) is dismissed. 31. WP227 No.302 of 2025 :- 32. In WP227 No.302 of 2025, the learned Trial Court rejected IA No.16, an application moved by the plaintiff under Order 14 Rule 5 of the CPC. 33. The plaintiff has proposed 16 additional issues in the application filed under Order 14 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The additional issues proposed by the plaintiff are reproduced as under:- “वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) नि(cid:7)म्(cid:7) नि(cid:7)वा(cid:9)दी(cid:7) करता(cid:2) है(cid:14)। 1. वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) सि(cid:18)निवाल वा(cid:2)दी ्ቚस्ता(cid:22)ता निकया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) है(cid:14)। जो(cid:26) आजो (cid:18)(cid:22)(cid:7)वा(cid:2)ई है(cid:9)ता(cid:22) नि(cid:7)याता है(cid:14)। 2. वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) वा(cid:2)दी क(cid:9) आधा(cid:2)र पर ताथा(cid:2) उ(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:9) (cid:18)!बं!सिधाता ताथ्या पर वा(cid:2)दी ्ቚश्(cid:7) नि(cid:7)नि%&ता (cid:7)है’ निकया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) है(cid:14)। वा(cid:2)दी क(cid:9) अ(cid:7)(cid:22)(cid:18)(cid:2)र नि(cid:7)म्(cid:7)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:22)(cid:18)(cid:2)र वा(cid:2)दी ्ቚश्(cid:7) नि(cid:7)नि%&ता निकया(cid:2) जो(cid:2)वा(cid:9)। 1.क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) (cid:18)(cid:4)ट (cid:7)!. 44, प्ल(cid:2)ट (cid:7)!. 3/1 ((cid:7)या(cid:2) (cid:7)!बंर 3/1, 3/4, 3/5) रकबं(cid:2) 10705 वाग&फू- ट ग(cid:2)!धा(cid:4) चौ/क र(cid:2)यागढ़ (छ.ग.), ቝኌस्थाता %क(cid:2)(cid:7) (cid:7)!बंर 38 (प(cid:22)र(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:2) (cid:7)!बंर 5/10 (cid:18)(cid:9) 5/17) (cid:7)या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)्ቑ& (cid:7)!. 17 क(cid:2) स्था(cid:2)या(cid:4) नि(cid:7)वा(cid:2)(cid:18)(cid:4) है(cid:14)। 10 2. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) उ्ቈर(cid:2)सिधाक(cid:2)र(cid:4) है(cid:26)(cid:7)(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) हैक वा असिधाक(cid:2)र क6 है(cid:14)। 3. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) स्वा. ቦኍ(cid:4)%ता(cid:4) ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) पदी(cid:2)&(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:7) %निहैल(cid:2) था(cid:4) 4.क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) ቦኍ(cid:4)%ता(cid:4) ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) लकवा(cid:2) (cid:18)(cid:9) प(cid:4)नि9ता था(cid:4), सिजो(cid:18)क(cid:9) क(cid:2)रण चौल(cid:7)(cid:9)-निफूर(cid:7)(cid:9) वा बं(cid:26)ल(cid:7)(cid:9) %; अ(cid:18)%था& था(cid:4)। 5. क्या(cid:2) ቦኍ(cid:4)%ता(cid:4) ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) क(cid:2)न्वा;(cid:18) ्ቑ(cid:4)्ቑ क(cid:9) क(cid:2)ल(cid:2)वासिधा %; र(cid:2)यागढ़ (छ.ग.) %; रहै(cid:7)(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क(cid:9) निबं(cid:7)(cid:2) पቝኌश्चौ% बं!ग(cid:2)ल क(cid:26)लक(cid:2)ता(cid:2) %; निवाल(cid:9)ख रसिजोस्ट्ቑ& निकया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) था(cid:2)। 6. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) (cid:18)ग(cid:9) बं9(cid:9) भा(cid:2)ई %है(cid:9)श क(cid:22) %(cid:2)र जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) वा बंहै(cid:7) प(cid:22)ष्प(cid:2) (cid:18)र(cid:2)फू क(cid:9) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) फूजो@ वा कपटप-ण& तार(cid:4)क(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क(cid:2) पता(cid:2) क(cid:26)लक(cid:2)ता(cid:2) दीश(cid:2)&ता(cid:9) हैAए र(cid:2)यागढ़ (छ.ग.) %; ቝኌस्थाता (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ (cid:18)(cid:4)ट (cid:7)!. 44, प्ल(cid:2)ट (cid:7)!. 3/1, रकबं(cid:2) 10705 वाग&फू- ट उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:26) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) (cid:18)(cid:9) छ(cid:22) प(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:9) क(cid:9) उቌኔ(cid:9)श्या (cid:18)(cid:9) अन्या र(cid:2)ज्या पቝኌश्चौ% बं!ग(cid:2)ल क(cid:26)लक(cid:2)ता(cid:2) %; अ!ቇኔ(cid:9)जो(cid:4) शब्दीG %; फूजो@ वा क(cid:22) टरनिचौता तार(cid:4)क(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क6 जो(cid:2)(cid:7)क(cid:2)र(cid:4) क(cid:9) निबं(cid:7)(cid:2) क(cid:26)लक(cid:2)ता(cid:2) प!जो(cid:4)याक क(cid:9) क(cid:2)या(cid:2)&लया %; निवाल(cid:9)ख रसिजोस्ट्ቑ& निकया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) था(cid:2)। जो(cid:26) वा(cid:2)स्तावा %; ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) ्ቅ%(cid:2)!क 1 वा 2 क(cid:9) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) स्वा. ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4)दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) क(cid:26) (cid:18)-निचौता (cid:7)है’ क6 गई था(cid:4) एवा! याहै ताथ्या वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क(cid:9) ሺኋ(cid:2)(cid:7) %; (cid:7)है’ था(cid:2)। 7. क्या(cid:2) ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) ्ቅ%(cid:2)!क 1 वा 2 ल(cid:26)भा %; आकर वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क6 अ%-ल्या उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:26) अक(cid:9) ल(cid:9) है(cid:4) कपटप-ण& तार(cid:4)क(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) है9प कर जो(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:2) चौ(cid:2)हैता(cid:9) था(cid:9)। 8.क्या(cid:2) ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) ्ቅ%(cid:2)!क 1 वा 2 वा वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क(cid:9) %ध्या %(cid:2)L वा प(cid:22)्ቔ, प(cid:22)्ቔ(cid:4) क(cid:2) (cid:18)!बं!धा है(cid:14)। ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) ्ቅ%(cid:2)!क 1 वा 2 (cid:7)(cid:9) प(cid:22)्ቔ, प(cid:22)्ቔ(cid:4) क(cid:9) (cid:18)!बं!धा क(cid:2) गलता फू(cid:2)यादी(cid:2) उठा(cid:2)कर निक(cid:18)(cid:4) अन्या ्ቚया(cid:26)जो(cid:7) क6 धा(cid:7)(cid:2)दी(cid:9)श क(cid:26) फूजो@ वा क- टरनिचौता तार(cid:4)क(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) रसिजोस्ट्ቑ& निवाल(cid:9)खG %; दीश(cid:2)&या(cid:2) गया(cid:2) है(cid:14)। जो(cid:26) निक एक निदीख(cid:2)वा(cid:2) %(cid:2)्ቔ है(cid:14)। 9.क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) (cid:7)(cid:9) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:2) वा(cid:2)स्तावा %; निवा्ቅया (cid:7) कर(cid:7)(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) निवा्ቅयाप्ቔ (cid:18)(cid:9) ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4)गण क(cid:26) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ %; 11 क(cid:26)ई असिधाक(cid:2)र श(cid:9)ष (cid:7)है’ है(cid:14)। 10. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) स्वा. ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) क(cid:9) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:2) क(cid:26)ई भा(cid:4) ्ቚनिताफूल (cid:7)है’ ल(cid:9)(cid:7)(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:9) निवा्ቅयाप्ቔ अवा(cid:14)धा वा श-न्या है(cid:14)l 11.क्या(cid:2) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) क(cid:2) नि(cid:7)वा(cid:2)(cid:18) स्था(cid:2)(cid:7) था(cid:2) वा लग(cid:2)ता(cid:2)र अप(cid:7)(cid:9) नि(cid:7)वा(cid:2)(cid:18) स्था(cid:2)(cid:7) %; रहै रहै(cid:4) था(cid:4) वा उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:26) निवा्ቅया कर(cid:7)(cid:9) क(cid:2) इर(cid:2)दी(cid:2) कभा(cid:4) (cid:7)है’ था(cid:2)। एवा! ख(cid:22)श(cid:4)प-वा&क वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:2)था अप(cid:7)(cid:9) भावा(cid:7) %; नि(cid:7)वा(cid:2)(cid:18) कर रहै(cid:4) था(cid:4)। 12. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) भा(cid:2)ई वा बंहै(cid:7) %है(cid:9)श क(cid:22) %(cid:2)र जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) वा प(cid:22)ष्प(cid:2) (cid:18)र(cid:2)फू क(cid:9) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) क(cid:2)न्वा;(cid:18) ्ቑ(cid:4)्ቑ (cid:18)(cid:9) (cid:18)(cid:2)ता वाष& पश्चौ(cid:2)ता (cid:18)(cid:7)Q 1994-95 %; वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क6 %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) क6 %Rत्या(cid:22) क(cid:9) दी(cid:26) %(cid:2)है प-वा& (cid:7)(cid:2)%(cid:2)!तारण क(cid:2) आवा(cid:9)दी(cid:7) ` दी(cid:9)कर अप(cid:7)(cid:9) (cid:7)(cid:2)% (cid:18)(cid:9) (cid:18)!निदीग्धा रूप (cid:18)(cid:9) (cid:7)(cid:2)%(cid:2)!तारण करवा(cid:2) सिलया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) था(cid:2)। 13.क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) भा(cid:2)ई-बंहै(cid:7) ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) फूजो@ रूप (cid:18)(cid:9) ्ቚस्ता(cid:22)ता (cid:7)(cid:2)%(cid:2)!तारण क(cid:9) आवा(cid:9)दी(cid:7) %; स्वा. बं(cid:7)वा(cid:2)र(cid:4) ल(cid:2)ल जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) क(cid:26) आ% %(cid:22)ቝኌVताया(cid:2)र क(cid:9) रूप %; दीनिश&ता निकया(cid:2) गया(cid:2) है(cid:14)। जोबंनिक स्वा.बं(cid:7)वा(cid:2)र(cid:4) ल(cid:2)ल जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) क(cid:9) प(cid:2)(cid:18) स्वा. ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) क(cid:2) आ% %(cid:22)ቝኌVताया(cid:2)र (cid:7)है’ था(cid:2)। 14.क्या(cid:2) ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4)गण क(cid:9) जोवा(cid:2)बंदी(cid:2)वा(cid:2) %; वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) कब्जो(cid:9) क6 ्ቚकR निता क(cid:26) ल(cid:9)कर निवार(cid:26)धा(cid:2)भा(cid:2)(cid:18) है(cid:14) 15.क्या(cid:2) ्ቚनितावा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) ्ቅ%(cid:2)!क 4 (cid:18)(cid:9) 7 ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दीቇኔस्ता भा-नि% %क(cid:2)(cid:7) पर अवा(cid:14)धा रूप (cid:18)(cid:9) कब्जो(cid:2) ्ቚ(cid:2)् कर(cid:7)(cid:9) क(cid:2) ्ቚया(cid:2)(cid:18) निकया(cid:2) जो(cid:2) रहै(cid:2) है(cid:14)। 16. क्या(cid:2) वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) अप(cid:7)(cid:4) %(cid:2)ता(cid:2) ्ቚक(cid:2)शवाता(cid:4) दी(cid:9)वा(cid:4) जोगतार(cid:2)%क(cid:2) (cid:18)(cid:9) प(cid:22)्ቔ है(cid:26)(cid:7)(cid:9) क(cid:9) (cid:7)(cid:2)ता(cid:9) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ (cid:18)!पसि्ቈ क(cid:2) कब़्ቚ(cid:2) ्ቚ(cid:2)् निकया(cid:2) है(cid:14) एवा! नि(cid:7)र!तार वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) कब्जो(cid:9) %; है(cid:14) एवा! (cid:18)(cid:9)टल््ቑ प(cid:26)श(cid:9)श(cid:7) है(cid:14)। 3. वा(cid:2)दी(cid:4) क(cid:9) वा(cid:2)दी क(cid:9) (cid:18)!दीभा& %; वा (cid:18)म्याक नि(cid:7)र(cid:2)करण है(cid:9)ता(cid:22) उपर(cid:26)्ሹ प-वा& नि(cid:7)नि%&ता वा(cid:2)दी ्ቚश्(cid:7)G %; (cid:7)या(cid:9) क(cid:2) (cid:18)!रचौ(cid:7)(cid:2) निकया(cid:2) जो(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:2) न्या(cid:2)या(cid:26)निचौता है(cid:26)ग(cid:2)। अन्याथा(cid:2) न्या(cid:2)या क6 %!श(cid:2) निवाफूल है(cid:26) जो(cid:2)वा(cid:9)ग(cid:4)।” 34. It is not in dispute that the plaintiff has pleaded these facts in the plaint and defendant No.1 has denied the said averments. 12 35. Proposed Issue No.10 is already covered by Issues No.1, 4, and 5, which have been framed by the learned trial Court. Therefore, Proposed Issue No.10 is not relevant. Similarly, Proposed Issue No.2 can be adjudicated upon while deciding Issues No.1, 2, 4, and 5; hence, no need to frame this issue separately. 36.With regard to Proposed Issue No.3 — “Whether the mother of the plaintiff, namely Smt. Prakashwati Devi Jagatramka, was a pardanashin woman?”. It is noted that there are sufficient pleadings to that effect in the plaint, and defendant No.1 has denied the said averments. Accordingly, this issue is relevant and requires to be framed for proper adjudication of the case. 37. The proposed Issue No.5 can be decided by the learned trial Court while deciding Issue No.6 framed on 27.10.2023. Therefore, there is no need to frame this issue separately. 38. Proposed Issues No.6, 7, and 8 are already covered with Issue No.6 framed by the learned trial Court on 27.10.2023. Therefore, there is no need to frame these issues again. 39. Proposed Issue No.9 can be considered while deciding Issues No.1, 2, 4, and 5. Hence, it is not required to be framed separately. 40. With regard to Proposed Issue No.10, the plaintiff is at liberty to lead evidence to prove that no consideration passed to his mother, namely late Smt. Prakashwati Devi Jagatramka. Since this aspect is already covered with Issue No.6 framed by the trial Court, framing of a separate issue is unwarranted. 41. Proposed Issue No.11 is substantially similar to Proposed Issue No.3. Therefore, there is no requirement to frame both issues. 42. As regards Proposed Issue No.12, although the plaintiff has pleaded that a mutation order was passed in favour of defendant No.1 and his sister 13 immediately after the death of his mother, the plaintiff has not challenged the said mutation order. Hence, this issue need not be framed. 43. With reference to Proposed Issue No.13, the plaintiff has specifically pleaded that the late Shri Banwari Lal Jagatramka was shown as the power of attorney holder in the mutation proceedings, though he was never appointed as such by the late Smt. Prakashwati Devi Jagatramka. The averments made by the plaintiff in this regard have been denied by defendant No.1. Therefore, the trial Court ought to have framed this crucial issue. 44. Proposed Issues No.14, 15, and 16 pertain to possession and permanent injunction. However, the plaintiff has not sought any relief in respect of the possession. Therefore, these issues are not relevant and need not be framed. 45.Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.16) filed by the plaintiff under Order XIV Rule 5 of the CPC is partly allowed. 46. The learned trial Court is directed to frame additional issues as indicated above. 47.The present petition (W.P. (227) No.302 of 2025) is allowed in part. 48.As a result, WP227 No.168 of 2025 is allowed, WP227 No.169 of 2025 is dismissed & WP227 No.302 of 2025 is allowed in part. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim