SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Krishana Kumari Devi vs Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo 2 … on 4 October, 2019

1
FA No.119 of 2017

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Judgment reserved on 26-04-2019

Judgment delivered on 04-10-2019

[Arising out of judgment and decree dated 23-12-2016 passed by
the First Additional District Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur, in civil suit
No.1-A/2012]

FA No. 119 of 2017

1. Smt. Krishana Kumari Devi, Aged About 57 Years approx,
W/o Late Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo,

2. Shri Kamal Chandra Bhanjdeo, Aged About 32 Years approx,
S/o Late Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo,

3. Ku. Gayatri Devi, Aged About 30 Years, D/o Late Bharat
Chandra Bhanjdeo

Appellant No.1 to 3 all residing at Palace Compound,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh

—- Appellants

Versus

1. Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo S/o Late Vijoy Chandra Bhanjdeo,
Aged About 43 Years R/o Palace compound, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

2. Jyoti Kumari Bhanjdeo W/o Late Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo
Aged About 54 Years.

3. Mohit Chandra Bhanjdeo S/o Late Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo,
Aged About 29 Years,

4. Kumari Juhika Bhanjdeo D/o Late Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo
Aged About 31 Years

Respondent no. 2 to 4 are residing at – Palace compound
Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.)

5. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, Mahanadi
Bhawan District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh,
2
FA No.119 of 2017

6. Smt Pramila Tiwari W/o Basantlal Residence – Kunwar Bada,
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh

7. Smt Basanti Pandey W/o Rikheshwar Pandey Residence –
Shiv Mandir Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

8. Dulichandra S/o Mulram Chandra Sonar Residence-
Ramaiyapara, Jagdalpur District- Bastar Chhattisgarh,

9. Sardar Jang Bahadur Singh S/o Late Trilochan Singh Aged
About 45 Years approx

10. Sardar Prithvipal Singh S/o Late Trilochan Singh Aged About
40 Years

Both respondent no. 9 and 10 Residing At Gidam Road,
Jagdalpur District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

11. Brijesh Bajpai S/o Umashankar Bajpai Age About 35 Years,
Advocate, R/o – Pratapganj Para, Jagdalpur District- Bastar
Chhattisgarh

12. Vinodanand Jha S/o Narayan Jha Brahman R/o- Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh

13. Smt Madhubala W/o Ramanand Jha, Bramhan R/o- Gandhi
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

14. V. Natraj Mudliyar S/o M. Mudliyar R/o- District – Bastar
Chhattisgarh

15. Smt Kanchan Gouri W/o Prabhudas Sanghani R/o District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh

16. Smt Krishnawati W/o Bharat Kumar Kankiya R/o- District –
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

17. Yashpal Singh Thakur S/o Surajbhan Singh Thakur R/o-
Nayamunda Ward Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

18. Abdul Hafis S/o Abdul Rahim, cast Musalman, R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

19. Shri Narayan Das S/o Shyamlal Sindhi R/o Nayapara,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh

20. Ramchandra Singh S/o Parsuram Singh Khatri R/o – Lalbaag,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
3
FA No.119 of 2017

21. Khem Narayan S/o Kritilal, S/o Arjunlal Sinha R/o –
Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

22. Nilkaran S/o Late Duaru Gond R/o- Kumharpara, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh

23. Mahesh Kumar S/o Shersingh Sahare R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

24. Bonuram S/o Thakur Ram Kawar R/o – Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

25. Vijay Kumar Agrawal S/o Triloklath Agrawal R/o- Main
Road, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

26. Pramod Kumar Laldas S/o D. Mahavirlal Das R/o Nirmal
Vidhyalay Ke Pas, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

27. Ajay Kumar Svami S/o Bhagwan Kumar Svami R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

28. Dhannu Maharana S/o Yudhisthir Maharana R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

29. Ram Murti Singh S/o late Rambharat Paal Singh R/o – Gandhi
Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

30. Tausif Rahim S/o M.M. Rahim R/o- Nayamunda, Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

31. Narsing Pandey S/o Bodhan Pandey Mishtri R/o –
Gangamunda Para, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

32. Ramkumar Jha S/o Harikant Jha R/o Gandhi Nagar,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

33. Arun Kumar Jha S/o Harikant Jha R/o- Gandhi Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

34. Satyadev Jha S/o Harikant R/o- Gandhi Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

35. Smt. Foolwari Pandey W/o Shri Ram Mangal Pandey R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

36. Jagpaal Singh S/o Bhupendra Singh R/o – Jagdalpur District-
Bastar Chhattisgarh.
4
FA No.119 of 2017

37. Ajaypaal Singh S/o Bhupendra Singh R/o – Jagdalpur District-
Bastar Chhattisgarh.

38. Parsuram Singh S/o Ramjatan Singh R/o- Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

39. Kumari Kasturi Mishra D/o Late Prasidhdh Narayan R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

40. Smt Krishna Bai Rathore W/o Narayan Singh Rathore R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

41. Ramprasad S/o Ganesh Prasad Jaysaval R/o- Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

42. Shriram S/o Jadunandan Kushvaha R/o- Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh.

43. Diwakar Prasad Pandey S/o Bhagrehi Pandey R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.

44. Smt Lakhama Devi W/o Motilal Sharma R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar (Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

45. Smt Meen Kunvar W/o Shri Rakesh Pandey R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

46. Smt Sogar Devi W/o Shri Kamta Prasad Trivedi R/o-
Rajendra Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

47. Dinanath S/o Shri Ray Kushvaha R/o- Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

48. Smt Mona Bai Gupta W/o Lalbahadur Gupta R/o- Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

49. Smt Rajrani W/o Siyolal Shrivas R/o- Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

50. Shri Tribhuvan Dev Ravani S/o Bhagat Prasad Ravani R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
5
FA No.119 of 2017

51. Vyomkesh Pandey S/o Deokaran Pande R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

52. Indrani Yadu D/o K.P. Yadu R/o- Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

53. Kameshvar Prasad Yadu S/o Budhai Ram Yadu R/o- Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

54. Satendra Singh S/o Gorakhnath Singh R/o- Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

55. Aayodhya Prasad S/o Ram Dayal Shrivas R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

56. Smt Krishna Bai Raikol W/o Narayan Singh Raikol R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

57. Ashok Kumar Deshmukh S/o Bhimrao Deshmukh R/o-
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

58. Dr. C.L. Sharma S/o Bhagat Ram Sharma R/o- Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

59. Ram Prasad S/o Banarasi Mistri R/o- Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

60. Ratan Singh S/o Chunnu Singh Thakur R/o- Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

61. Yashvant Singh S/o Narayan Singh Rajput R/o- Kunvar Bada,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

62. Smt Hiradevi W/o Ghanshyam Tiwari R/o- Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
6
FA No.119 of 2017

63. Kumari Suman D/o Purmir R/o Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

64. Kumari Sulochna D/o Purmir R/o Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

65. Kumari Sobha D/o Purmir, R/o Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

66. Sagar Devi W/o Satyanarayan Pathak, R/o Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

67. Smt. Amma Bai, W/o Sheikh Imamuddin, R/o Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

68. Kumari Keshar Mishra D/o Prasiddh Narayan Mishra, R/o
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

69. Aanand Lal Sen S/o Lakshaman Prasad Sen, R/o Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

70. Kamlavati Bai, W/o Bayant Prasad Kushvaha, R/o Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

71. Indrajit Upadhyay, S/o R.S. Upadhyay, R/o Hikmipara,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

72. Ghanshyam Upadhyay, S/o R.S. Upadhyay, R/o Hikmipara,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

73. Brijlal S/o Paklu Yadav, R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

74. Bhanukumar, S/o Gulab Chandra Jain, R/o Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
7
FA No.119 of 2017

75. Vinod Kumar Jain S/o Gulal Chandra Jain, R/o Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

76. Smt. Seebavati Devi W/o Ram Ratan Singh, R/o Danteshvari
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

77. Smt. Manharan Devi W/o Govind Prasad Devi, R/o
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

78. Ram Ji S/o Prem Singh Devangan R/o Danteshvari Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

79. Nandkumar Deshmukh S/o Bhimrao Deshmukh, R/o
Danteshvari Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

80. Shri Ram S/o Jadunandan Kushvaha, R/o Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

81. Kamal Kumar, S/o Jagdish Rai, R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

82. Ramkumr Jha S/o Arun Kumar Jha, R/o Jagdalpur, District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

83. Smt Kishvar Johan W/o Jaminal R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

84. Rajkumar S/o Ram Chandra Gupta, R/o Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

85. Smt Khurshid Begam W/o Mohammad Iliyas Siddhqi R/o
Rajendra Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar
Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

86. Smt. Urmila Kanunango W/o Vishvmarti Kanunango, R/o
Rajendra Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar
Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
8
FA No.119 of 2017

87. Prabhati Bai, W/o Vrindavan Prasad Yadav, R/o Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

88. Moh. Ismail S/o Mahbub Ali, R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

89. Moh. Jafar Ali, S/o Mahbub Ali, R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

90. Bhanu Kumar S/o Gulab Jain, R/o Rajendra Nagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

91. Vinod Kumar S/o Gulab Chandra Jain, R/o Rajendra Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

92. Smt. Sarojni Devi W/o Govind Kanunango, R/o Rajendra
Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh.,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

93. Vivekanand Jha S/o Narayan Jha, R/o Jagdalpur, District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

94. Raghuveer Singh S/o Sardar Basant Singh, R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

95. Ramfer Yadav S/o Bhagwati Prasad Yadav, R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

96. Tulshiram Sahani, S/o Ramcharan Sahani, R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

97. Smt. Gurumit Kour W/o Milkiyat Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

98. Smt. Ganpati Bai, D/o Chakkar Dhobi, R/o Jagdalpur, District
– Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
9
FA No.119 of 2017

99. Shardar Balvind Singh S/o Suchcha Singh, R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

100. Mahendra Singh S/o Buta Singh, R/o Hikmipara, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

101. Gurumukh Singh, S/o Muhindra Singh, R/o Hikmipara,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

102. Smt. Ramwati W/o Lt. Bachchan Singh R/o Itwari Bazar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

103. Shafi Khan S/o Sardar Khan Musalman, R/o Itwari Bazar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

104. Ramnarayan S/o Shyamlal Saksena, R/o Itwari Bazar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

105. Rajesh Kumar Jain S/o Sannat Kumar Jain, R/o Sadar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

106. Mandip Singh Now Major S/o Balvindar Singh, S/o Suchcha
Singh, R/o Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. ,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

107. Sardar Basdev Singh S/o Suchcha Singh, R/o Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

108. Abhimanyu Prasad S/o Bhagirathi, R/o Hikmipara, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

109. Sardar Gurudev Singh S/o Sardar Bhajan Singh, R/o
Hikmipara, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District
: Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

110. Smt. Manki Bai D/o Ramnath Harijan, R/o Ganganagar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
10
FA No.119 of 2017

111. Tarakant Jha S/o Aniruddh Jha R/o Jagdalpur, District – Bastar
Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

112. Smt. P. Surma W/o P. Ramelu R/o Kumharpara, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh. , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

113. Smt Aayati Bai D/o Shitaram Yadav R/o Mahadev Ghat
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

114. Govind Sharma S/o Begraj Sharma R/o Itwari Bazar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

115. Nijamuddin S/o Babuali Musalman R/o Kchorapara,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

116. Smt. Urmila W/o Rajkumar Lal Kan, R/o Kachorapara,
Jagdalpur, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

117. Smt Nandan Devi W/o Sultan Chandra Khatri R/o Shanti
Nagar Ward , Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

118. Smt Vinita W/o Basant Kumar Chouhan R/o Sadar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

119. Veernarayan Naidu S/o Krishna Naydu R/o Keuramunda
Ward, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar , District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

120. Motilal Duggad S/o Bhomraj Duggad R/o Sadar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

121. Smt Dharmistha Singh W/o K. K. Singh R/o- Ramaiya Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

122. Lakshami Amma Soni W/o Rama Rao Soni R/o – Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
11
FA No.119 of 2017

123. Abdul Kadir S/o Late Abdul Rahim R/o – Itwari Bazar,
Jagdalpur , District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

124. Smt Nirmala Devi W/o Munnidevi Singh R/o – Jagdalpur ,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

125. Yam Layati Mavilla S/o Manoranjan R/o – Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

126. Rajib Apparao S/o Gajanand Sinha R/o – Kotpad, Orisa,
District : Koraput, Orissa

127. Smt Manik Amma Soni W/o P. Appal Swami R/o Sadar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

128. Ram Krishann Nair R/o- Jagdalpur District – Bastar
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

129. Pramod Kumar S/o Jagdish Ram R/o- Jagdalpur District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

130. Pitambar Mahapatra S/o R.K. Mahapatra R/o – Bhairamganj ,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

131. Smt Saraswati Bai W/o Prabhuram Alba R/o- Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

132. Hitendra Mohan Chudhary S/o Kunj Mohan Chudhary R/o –
Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

133. Smt Dulari Devi W/o Kamla Singh Thakur R/o- Bacheli,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

134. Smt Shakila Begam W/o Dost Mohammad R/o- Kevramunda,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

135. Smt Parvati Bai W/o Ratansi Vasta Chavda R/o- Kevramunda,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
12
FA No.119 of 2017

136. Smt Chandramani D/o Basantkumar R/o – Kotpal, Orrisa,
Orissa

137. Annaual Haq Indusiya R/o – Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

138. Dhaniram Sharma S/o Baldev Sharma R/o- Jagdalpur District
– Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

139. P. Chinna Rao S/o P. Appal Naidu R/o- Jagdalpur District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

140. Smt Subhadra Dasit W/o Shuryakar Dasit R/o- Gangamund
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

141. Jwala Prasad Ahirvar S/o Gumman Chudhry R/o Gandhi
Nagar Kota Jlaun Uttarpradesh , District : Jalaun, Uttar
Pradesh

142. T. Kundal Rao S/o Rajgopal Rao R/o – Dharmpura, Jagdalpur,
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

143. Smt Nageshi Bai W/o Devnath R/o- Jagdalpur District –
Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

144. Smt Anupama W/o T. Kundal Rao R/o – Dharmpura,
Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

145. Smt Subha Rambho W/o P. Lakshmi Narayan R/o-
Kevramunda, Jagdalpur, District – Bastar Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

146. Bharat Chikhlikar S/o Harihar Chikhlikar R/o- Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

147. Harinarayan Suryavanshi S/o Bhiranlal Suryavanshi R/o-
Jagdalpur District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

148. Budhram S/o Sobharam R/o – Police Line, Jagdalpur, District-
Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
13
FA No.119 of 2017

149. Chagan Lal Bhura S/o Tulaiya Ram Bhura R/o- Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

150. Devnath Bhura S/o Tuaiya Ram Bhura R/o- Jagdalpur District
– Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

151. Satya Dev Bhura S/o Tuaiya Ram Bhura R/o- Jagdalpur
District – Bastar Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

152. Subrat Ranjan Das S/o Satya Ranjan Das R/o Maharani
Hospital Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

153. Sudha Sahu W/o Gadesh Kumar R/o Maitri Singh, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

154. Sulabh Mishra W/o Rajesh Kumar R/o Santhosi Ward Sangh,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

155. Sulja Jha W/o Dilip Jha R/o Maharani Ward, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

156. Shankar Prasad Tiwari S/o Chaitanya Prasad R/o
Gangamunda Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

157. Datadin Sao S/o Gopinath Sao R/o Pratapgang Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh

……………..Purchasers Respondent No. 152 To 157

158. Smt. Susamma Gorge W/o Platus R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh,

159. Satish Kumar Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

160. Abhya Kumar Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

161. Jaichandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
14
FA No.119 of 2017

162. Pradeep Kumar Jain S/o Premchandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

163. Basant Kumar Jain S/o Premchandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

164. Gurudev Singh S/o Sardar Jagpal Singh R/o Jaipur Koraput,
Orissa., District : Koraput, Orissa

165. Sukhbeer Singh S/o Deevan Singh R/o Rajmahl, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

166. Manisha Juna D/o Aalya Isai R/o Kumharpara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

167. Sunil Singh S/o Rakhelchandra Sen R/o Nayamundda,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

168. Chonori Mohammad S/o Mohammad R/o Pratapgang Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

169. Kanhaiyalal Mandal S/o Mandal Ishwar Aadhr R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

170. Smt Parvati Ratan Brabha W/o Padlam R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

171. Sakuntala Gautam W/o Jagdish Prasad R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

172. Smt. Haldhar W/o Harilal R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

173. Salav Ranjan Kar S/o Durga Mohan Lal R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

174. Smt. Kriti Bai W/o Nirmal Benarji R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
15
FA No.119 of 2017

175. Jaikumar Jain S/o Lt. Kamalchandra R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

176. Nirmal Kumar S/o Kamal Chandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

177. T. Parvati Soni W/o P. Appal Swami R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

178. K. Venketvatsala Rao S/o K. Khandeshvar R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

179. Kundan Singh S/o Lakha Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

180. Sardar Divan Singh S/o Sardar Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

181. Smt. Balveer Kour W/o Sardar Divan Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

182. Smt. Padma Tiwari W/o Mateshar R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

183. Chote Khan S/o Yusuf Ali Khan R/o Malkangiti Kuraput,
Orissa., District : Koraput, Orissa

184. Jethmal S/o Nagraj Khatri R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

185. Smt. Sagni Devi W/o Jyethmal Khatri R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

186. Omprakash S/o Ghasiram Malvi R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

187. Umashankar Bajpai S/o Late Gangacharan Bajpai R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
16
FA No.119 of 2017

188. Khemchandra S/o Rekhchandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

189. Liladhar S/o Bhojraj Khatri R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

190. Bhavar Lal S/o Hastimal Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

191. Premchandra S/o Sardarmal Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

192. Mahila Siddh Nirmal Yojna By Smt Shashikiran Jha, W/o
Jaiprakash Jha, R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

193. Smt Santosh Rani Chokar W/o Rajroop Singh R/o Abhaguda,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

194. Smt Savita Chaudhry W/o Hirendra Mohan Chudhary R/o
Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District
: Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

195. Janman Mohan S/o K. N. Jyonathan R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

196. Magraj Khatri S/o Dalchandra Khatri R/o Pratapgang,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

197. Dingadamal S/o Dalchandra Khatri R/o Pratapgang,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

198. Ranidan D/o Bhikhamchandra Chandraak R/o Pratapgang,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh

199. Devkishan S/o Udaram Tiwari R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

200. Smt. Sushila Daga W/o Satish Kumar Daga R/o Pratapgang,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
17
FA No.119 of 2017

201. Darshan Singh S/o Dattar Singh Sardar R/o Jaipur, Orissa.,
Orissa

202. Anup Bagchi S/o Amlendru Bagchi R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

203. Bhagwati Prasad S/o Mahadev Prasad Mishra R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

204. Smt. Ramkumari W/o Bansilal Bajpai R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

205. Smt Kamla Tiwari W/o Vijay P.D., R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

206. Smt. Ramkumari W/o Bansilal Bajpai R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

207. R S Atthaiya S/o Jayram Singh R/o Pathraguda, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

208. Yogendra Singh S/o Kartar Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

209. Dinesh Kumar S/o Prithvipal Mishra R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

210. R D Dhruv S/o S R Dhruv Gond R/o Pathraguda, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

211. Sohan Lal Bhura S/o Tulyaram Bhura R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

212. Kamal Kumar S/o Tulyaram Bhura R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

213. Babaseth Lakshaman Rao S/o V Krishnmurti R/o Amaguda,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh
18
FA No.119 of 2017

214. Tunnu S/o Villiam R/o Amaguda, Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

215. Smt. Radhamani Singh W/o Lal Pratap Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

216. Smt Sobha Marvah W/o Radheman Marvah R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

217. Ashok Aanand S/o Devraj Aanand R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

218. Vimla Aanand W/o Devraj Aanand R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

219. Vimla Aanand W/o Devraj Aanand R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

220. Ashok Aanand S/o Devraj Aanand R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

221. Ashvani Aanand S/o Devraj Aanand R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

222. Sudarshan Kumar Dua` S/o Balram Dua R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

223. Suresh Kumar Dua S/o Bulram Dua R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

224. Parvindar Singh Chadda S/o Rajendra Singh Chadda R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

225. Noor Mohammad D/o Ahmad Nbi R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh

226. Mohan Pratap S/o Bansilal Sahani R/o Civil Line Raipur,
Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
19
FA No.119 of 2017

227. Rameshchandra Upadhyay S/o Prabhashankar Upadhayay R/o
Kondagaon, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

228. Dharmendra Kumar Sharma S/o Kapildev Sharma R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

229. Smt Geeta Bai W/o Mulidhar Devangan R/o Bhairamgang
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

230. Mohammad Amnulla S/o Mo. Yusuf R/o Kirundul, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

231. Geeta Naidu W/o V. Danteshvar Naidu R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

232. Smt. Pushpa Dev W/o Abhimanyu Dev R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

233. Malti Dev W/o M S Vishvkarma R/o Gangamuda , Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

234. Nityanand S/o Satishchandra R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

235. Nalini Ranjan Rai W/o Harihar Rai R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

236. Noor Mohammad S/o Ahmad Bhai R/o Kevramuda Ward
Jagdalpur, Dist Bastar, CG, Dist : Bastar(Jagdalpur), CG

237. Hazi Aba Saheb Madni W/o Mo. Ali Madni R/o Vijaynagram
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

238. Smt Kamal Jeet Kaur Dhillon W/o Sardar Ishvan Singh Dillan
R/o Moti Tatabpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh

239. Malathi Lakshamand Prasad S/o M Lakshminarayan R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
20
FA No.119 of 2017

240. Goalpudi Shorab Murti S/o Shamya R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

241. T. Anjanelu S/o T Narsimhamurti R/ Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

242. M. Lakshamnan Prasad S/o Venktesh Varlu R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

243. M Lakshaminarayan S/o Venktesh Varlu R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh Chawli Bhanu Murti, S/o
Venktesh Varlu, R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

244. Goalpudi Sao S/o Goalpudi Saimyya R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

245. Musammad Fatima B W/o Mo. Jamshod (Babaji Saheb) R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

246. Mo. Jamshod Rusani Urf Babaji Saheb S/o Mo. Sultan R/o
Kirandul, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

247. Sardar Mhd. Gaus R/o Kirandul, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
Chhattisgarh

248. Mhd. Sultan R/o Kirandul, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
Chhattisgarh

249. Mhd. Sattar R/o Kirandul, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
Chhattisgarh

250. Mhd. Khvaja R/o Kirandul, Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
Chhattisgarh

251. Mhd. Siddhqi Husain Urf Babaji Saheb Muslim R/o Kirandul,
Distt. Bastar, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

252. Durga Singh S/o Devi Singh Negi R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
21
FA No.119 of 2017

253. Puran Singh S/o Devi Singh Negi R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

254. Dr. Manjulata D/o Ambika Prasad Avasthi R/o Budhapara
Raipur, Chhattisgarh

255. Dinesh Prate S/o Lt. Dasrath Parte

256. Kumari Anjana Pratre D/o Lt. Dasrath Parte

257. Sanjay Prate D/o Lt. Dasrath Parte

258. Rajana Jhode D/o Lt. Dasrath Parte

Respondents No.255 to 258 are R/o Vrindavan Colony,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

259. Giriraj Mahavar S/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

260. Smt. Vidhya Mahavar W/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

261. Smt Anita Gupta D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

262. Kumari Sangita Gupta D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

263. Smt Mamta Gupta D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

264. Smt. Kavita Gupta D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

265. Smt. Shweta Gupta D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

266. Smt Sunita Mahavar D/o Lt. Khemchandra Mahavar

Respondents No.259 to 266 are R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

267. Sarla D/o Ramsvarup Mishra R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

268. Amritlal S/o Bhauji Bhai R/o Mahadev Ghat Para, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

269. Smt Kalpana Kar W/o C K Pottdar R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
22
FA No.119 of 2017

270. Smt. Ranjana Nair W/o C K Nair R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

271. Kamal Krishn Chudhary S/o J K Chudhary R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

272. Shivkumar S/o Shivbodhan Prasad R/o Danteshvari ,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

273. Shyama Prasad Mukharji S/o Tirath Prasad Mukharji R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

274. Abdul Hafis Khan S/o Abdul Rashid Khan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

275. Umashankar Sharma S/o Ramdas Sharma R/o Kevramuda
Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

276. Smt. B. Bos D/o T K C Bos R/o Vijay Bhawan, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

277. Yasvant Kumar Rai S/o S. Ram R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

278. Yusuf Iqbal S/o Mo. H. Quraisi R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

279. Smt. Noorjhan Begam D/o Ramjan Khan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

280. Govind Pillye S/o Kumar Swamipilly R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

281. Tarachandra Agrawal S/o Rameshvar Agrawal R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

282. Smt Pramila D/o Mehatar Ram Dhruv R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
23
FA No.119 of 2017

283. Manohar Lal S/o Hariram Bachwani R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

284. Angad Singh S/o Ram Singh Thakur R/o Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.

285. Baba Rao S/o Krishna Rao R/o Kumharpara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

286. Ishvarkar R/o Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

287. Mohindra Kumar S/o Jain R/o Kevramuda Ward Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

288. Minakshi Bai W/o Makkhanlal Gupta R/o Raipur,
Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

289. Saroj W/o Satya Prakash Sahu R/o Motipara Durg,
Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

290. Suraj Lal S/o Kishan Lal Thantharate R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

291. Balaji Patnayak S/o Satya Narayan Patnayak R/o
Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District
: Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

292. Ramesh Kumar S/o Brijlal Dewangan R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

293. Kalawati W/o Dhanrajmal Sindhi R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

294. Ganeshi Bai W/o Devnath Bhura R/o Pratapgang, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

295. Anumala Sushma W/o Anumala Sitaramaiya R/o
Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District
: Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
24
FA No.119 of 2017

296. K. Peddi Raju S/o Peddi Tekli R/o Kumharpara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

297. Chandraa Bai W/o Abir Chandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

298. Girdhar Gopal S/o Pal Singh Dewangan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

299. Jugwati Bai W/o Maniram Dewangan R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

300. A V Nageshvar Rao S/o A V Jagannath Rao R/o Maharani
Hospital Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

301. Jitendra Kumar S/o V P Naththulal Dewangan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

302. Manoj Kumar S/o V P Naththulal Dewangan R/o
Bhairamgang Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District
: Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

303. Tarun Kumar S/o V P Naththulal Dewangan R/o Bhairamgang
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

304. Ramchandra Nagrani S/o Govardhan Das Nagrani R/o
Pratapgang, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

305. Sekh Vahit Quraisi S/o Sekh Karim Quraisi R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

306. Fatte Singh S/o Rao Uday Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

307. Damedar S/o Rambhau Kale R/o Dokrighat Para, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
25
FA No.119 of 2017

308. Rambhai R/o Dokrighat Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

309. Damodar S/o Krishnadatt Tiwari R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

310. Dinesh Chandra S/o Vishnudatta Upreti R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

311. Y V Raman Rao S/o Y V Surya Rao R/o Kevramuda Ward
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

312. Abdul Karim Khan S/o Abdul Sattar Khan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

313. Karimulla Khan S/o Abdul Sattar Khan R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

314. Nirmala Rathor W/o Shivlal Bhai R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

315. Basant S/o Ramchandra Baldev R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

316. Shivshankar S/o Mahadev Shikkar R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

317. Smt. Kekti Bai W/o Satyadev Bura R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

318. Lolugu Ramarao S/o Satyanarayan Nayadu R/o Kevaramunda
Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

319. Satyadev S/o Ramnarayan Tiwari R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

320. Rajesh Tiwari S/o Vidya Sagar Tiwari, R/o Ramaiyapara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh
26
FA No.119 of 2017

321. Kuwar Rani Sushil Kumari W/o Kuwar Durgadas R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

322. Chandra Prakash Singh S/o Raghuveer Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

323. Rajesh Tiwari S/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 30
Years

324. Roma D/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 28 Years

325. Geeta D/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 31 Years

326. Meena D/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 30 Years

327. Usha D/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 33 Years

328. Renu D/o Lt. Vidya Sagar Tiwari Aged About 25 Years

Responents No.323 to 328 are R/o Motitalab Para, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

329. Mihir Kumar S/o Jogendra Chandra Visvash (Dead through
Legal Heirs)

(a) Smt. Mandikuntala Bose, W/o Tushar Kanti Bose

(b) Malay Visvash, S/o Mihir Kumar Visvash

(c) Mridula Visvash, D/o Mihir Kumar Visvash

(d) Bulbul Visvash, D/o Mihir Kumar Visvash

(e) Papaiya Visvash, D/o Mihir Kumar Visvash

Respondents No.329 (a) to (e) are R/o D.K. Press, Vrindavan,
Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar (CG).

330. Anup Kumar S/o Amal Kumar Bangchi R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

331. Tusarkanti Bos S/o Dr. R.L. Bos R/o Kevramuda Ward
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
27
FA No.119 of 2017

332. Chaganlal Bhura S/o Tulaiyaram Bhura

333. Devnath Bhura S/o Tulaiyaram Bhura

334. Satyadev Bhura S/o Tulaiyaram Bhura

335. Kamal Kumar Bhura S/o Tulaiyaram Bhura

Respondents No.332 to 335 are R/o Pratapganj Para, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

336. Ram Krishna S/o Pal Singh Dewangan R/o Subhash
Ward,jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

337. K M Surendran S/o M. Madhwan R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

338. Smt. P.R Monamma W/o K M Surendran R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

339. Ramanand Shri Vashu R/o Geedam Road, Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

340. Sapan Kumar Roy S/o N C N Roy R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

341. M A Nagariya S/o Yusuf Nagariya R/o Kewramunda Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

342. K Durga Bai W/o K Shyamlal Rao R/o Kewramunda Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

343. Jogendra Singh S/o Sardar Diwan Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

344. Sukhbeer Singh S/o Gurdan Diwan Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
28
FA No.119 of 2017

345. Sheshnath Panday S/o Ambika Prasad Panday R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

346. Banshilal Chandraak S/o Motilal Chandraak R/o Pratap Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

347. Ashok Joshi R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

348. V K Kuriyan Kosh S/o Kuriya Kosh Govt. Employs P H E ,
R/o Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh, District :
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

349. L Kuriya Kosh S/o K D Kuriya Kosh Govt. Employs P H E ,
R/o Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh, District :
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

350. Motilal Duggad S/o Shobhraj Duggad R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

351. Govind Sharma S/o Vegraj Sharma R/o Itwara Bazar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

352. Smt. Ayati Bai W/o Sataram Yadav R/o Mahadev Ghat Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

353. G V Narayan Naydu S/o Lt. Krishana Naydu R/o
Kewramunda Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

354. Smt. Vinita W/o Basant Kumar Chohan R/o Sadar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

355. Smt Urmila Devi W/o Rajkumar Lal R/o Kacorapara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

356. Shri Nijamuddin S/o Babu Ali R/o Kacorapara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
29
FA No.119 of 2017

357. Smt. Jadav Devi W/o Sitan Chandra Khatri R/o Shanti Nagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

358. Smt. V Suramma W/o V. Shri Ramlu R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

359. Ravindra Bihari Vinod Bihar Ghusu Padari , R/o Jaipur M.
Lalkikar Kathrin Church, District Koraput, Orissa, Local
Address Kumharpara Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

360. Shri Kaluram Chandraak S/o Motilal Chandraak R/o
Pratapdev Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

361. Mahawar Vaisya Sewa Sansthan C/o President Premlal S/o
Chironjilal, R/o Shantinagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

362. Omprakash Sharma S/o Kishan Chandra Sharma R/o
Bodhghat Colony, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

363. Suktaram S/o Tirliram R/o N M D C Kirandul , Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

364. Krishana Kumar Varma S/o Sundarlal Varma R/o Barsur,
Tahsil Dantewada, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, CG District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

365. Smt. Suhag Devi W/o Rajendra Singh Chohan R/o
Ganganagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

366. Govind Sharma S/o Begraj Sharma R/o Itwari Bazar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

367. Udaykant Jha S/o Anirudra Jha R/o Hikmipara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

368. Ranjeet Kumar Niyogi S/o Motindra Nath Niyogi R/o
Kirandul, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh
30
FA No.119 of 2017

369. Tarakant Jha S/o Anirudh Jha R/o Hikmipara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

370. Suryakant Jha S/o Anirudh Jha R/o Hikmipara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

371. Khairun Nisha S/o Mohammad Yakub R/o Hikmipara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

372. Raj Mohammad S/o Nashirudin R/o Raipur, District Raipur,
Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

373. Prabhakar Damodar S/o Damodar Bakshi R/o Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

374. Birendra Ghosh S/o Satish Ghosh R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

375. Vivekanand Singh S/o Dashrath Singh R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

376. Vishnu Pad S/o Baburao R/o Kirandul, District Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

377. Praful S/o B. Nagendra Haldhar R/o Bangali Camp Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

378. Ratiram S/o Hirduram Bhatra R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

379. Kamla Rani Kar S/o Ajit Kumar Kar R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

380. Indrajeet Singh S/o Sardar Harnam Singh R/o Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

381. Ujagar Singh S/o Madhav Singh R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh
31
FA No.119 of 2017

382. Jagarnath Singh S/o Jaisingh Bhardwaj R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

383. Smt. Usha Rani W/o S K Sharma R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

384. Ganesh Ram Anand S/o Balbhadra Anand R/o Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

385. Ramadhin Yadav S/o Bhungeshwar Yadav R/o N M D C
Kirandul, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

386. Suktaram S/o Thirali Ram Muriya R/o N M D C Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

387. Champalal Vaidh S/o Lankaram Vaidh R/o Sirasar Chowk,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

388. Smt. Tohra Begam W/o Mo. Umar Khan R/o N M D C
Kirandul, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

389. Nageh Dutta Jha S/o Laxmi Dutta Jha R/o Sirashar Chowk,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

390. Sahidhull Jama Rijvi S/o Mh. Nijamudin Rijvi R/o N M D C
Kirandul, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District :
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

391. Smt. Sunaina Devi W/o Rajendra Prasad Varma R/o Bacholi ,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

392. Smt. Iarshad Begam S/o Abdul Rashid R/o M P E B Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

393. Smt. Chandrakala W/o Sudama Shrivashtav R/o Dokatighat
Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh., District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

394. Smt Ratna Rana W/o P S Rana R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
32
FA No.119 of 2017

395. Kuwar Chandra Singh S/o Vinayak Singh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

396. Smt. Sakuntala Srivashtav S/o N B Srivashtav Sub Engineer
PWD, Motitalab Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

397. Smt. Kusum Bai Pegad W/o Sukhram Pegad R/o Ganganagar
Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

398. Kamal Kumar S/o Jagdish Roy R/o Itwari Bazar Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

399. Champalal S/o Lankaram R/o Motitalabpara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

400. Sanjeev Kapoor [Deleted – in compliance of Order Dated
05-04-2019].

401. Smt. Prabhati Bai W/o Ramlal R/o Neelgudapara, Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

402. Sadashiv S/o Manbodh Sahu R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

403. Rajdhar Yadav S/o Gangaghar Yadav R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

404. Mahendra Singh S/o Madhav Singh Sikkh R/o Kirandul,
District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

405. Chandan Singh S/o Laxmi Singh R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

406. Ramkrishana S/o Raghunath Dewangan R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

407. Ganga Ghar Soni S/o Hablal Soni R/o Kirandul, District
Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh

408. Saiyad Akbar Ali S/o Saiyad Jamal R/o Kunwaramunda Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
33
FA No.119 of 2017

409. Ghasiram S/o Brijlal Sao R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

410. Kaliram S/o Brijlal Sao R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

411. Brijlal R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

412. Trilochan Singh S/o Sundar Singh R/o Gangamunda Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh. [Ex-Parte]

413. Ravalmal Jain S/o Nemichandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

414. Shrimal Jain S/o Nemichandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

415. Dharm Chandra Jain S/o Nami Chandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

416. Sagunchandra S/o Ghasidas Malviya Rathi R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

417. Smt. Sobhana Devi S/o Jagdish Prasad Khandelwal R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

418. Rajendra Kumar S/o Ram Kumar Mishra R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

419. Chetan Hari Narayan Suryavanshi S/o Viram Lal Suryavanshi
R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

420. Moshina Yunus D/o Eliyo Ishai R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

421. Kulmuli Rao Sahani S/o K S Ramchandra Rao R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
34
FA No.119 of 2017

422. Champa Devi W/o Madan Lal Chandraak R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

423. Radha Devi W/o Ajmal Solanki R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

424. Pramod Kumar S/o Jagdish Roy R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

425. Rajan Apparao S/o Rajan Narshingharao R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

426. Smt. Manikamma Soni W/o P. Appal Swami R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

427. Smt. Lolgu Padmavati W/o Lolgu Krishana Rao R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

428. Ravikumar Srivashtav S/o Damodar Lal Srivashtav R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

429. Smt. Usha Gondi W/o Lt. Sunil Gondi Aged About 40 Years

430. Ku. Pinky D/o Lt. Sunil Gondi Aged About 26 Years

431. Ku. Pooja D/o Lt. Sunil Gondi Aged About 23 Years

432. Mohit Gondi S/o Lt. Sunil Gondi Aged About 18 Years

Respondents No.429 to 432 are R/o Kewaramunda Ward
Murti Line Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh

433. Sanjeev Kumar Jain S/o Vijay Kumar Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

434. Munna Lal S/o Dayaram Pasine R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

435. Mohammad Akhtar Kureshi S/o Mohammad Ibrahim Kureshi
R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
35
FA No.119 of 2017

436. Smt. Kalpana Kar W/o S R Das R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

437. Ramesh Kumar S/o Gangaram R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

438. Smt. Vimal Nag Dev W/o Yugal Nag R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

439. Golpudi Sambhu Murti S/o Golpudi Ramaiya R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

440. Narendra Kumar S/o Bindchandra Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

441. Smt. Satyabhama W/o P V Bhama R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

442. Sukhlal S/o Chetan Dhurwa R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

443. Smt. Kiran S/o Shubramadiya R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

444. Shri Deepchand S/o Magalchandra R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

445. Ashish Chandrar S/o Laxmichandra R/o Mahadev Ghat Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

446. Kishore Kumar S/o Keshrichandra Parkh R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

447. Y N Ramna Rav S/o Y N Subarav R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

448. Rajnikant Padiya S/o P S Padiya R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, C/o Mr. Arjun Das, S/o Amrit Das, R/o
Near Murgi Form, Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar, CG.
36
FA No.119 of 2017

449. Dr. Dharmend Kumar S/o Kapil Dev Sarma R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

450. Parvindar Singh S/o Guruvchan Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

451. Jusvindar Singh S/o Guruvchan Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

452. Dinanath S/o Rajkisore Misra R/o Bacheli, Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

453. Shivparsad Dube S/o Surjpal Dube R/o Bacheli, Dantewada,
Chhattisgarh

454. Smt. Sanilal W/o Arun Chhua R/o Gangamunda Para,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

455. Pramod Kumar Motwal S/o Purusotam Motwal R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

456. Yogendra Kumar Motwal S/o Purusotam Motwal R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

457. Kalipad Mandal S/o Achan Kumar Mandal R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

458. Jay Kumar Jain S/o Shayam Chhand Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, CG, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

459. Satish Kumar Jain S/o Jaichhand Jain R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

460. Nirmal Kumar Jain S/o Semal Chhand Jain R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

461. Dost Mohammad S/o Nure Mohammad R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
37
FA No.119 of 2017

462. Smt. Vidushi Chaturvedi W/o V C Chaturvedi R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

463. Smt. Subhdra W/o Surychandra R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

464. Kumari Kushiliya S/o Gopal Das Meghani R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

465. Sangeeta Jain S/o Ravlmal Ganga R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

466. Kunwar Lal Jain S/o Rawnal Ganga R/o Bhairamganj Ward
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

467. Smt. Ashutosh Devi W/o Vikram Pandit R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

468. Ramkrishana Rav S/o Laxman Pawar R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

469. Smt. Subbalaxmi W/o Laxminarayan R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

470. P N Devendra Kumar S/o P Umasankar Rav R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

471. Tukaram S/o Naryan Rav Chhvhan R/o Village Merth
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

472. Smt. Madhu Shrivastv W/o A P Shrivastav R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

473. Smt. Vijay Laxmi W/o Premlal Mhawar R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh
38
FA No.119 of 2017

474. Yadu Pratap Singh S/o Uday Singh Thakur R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

475. Bhaktipriya S/o P Ramkrishn R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

476. Roshan Lal S/o Hemraj Saw R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

477. Rajendra Kumar S/o Hemraj Saw R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

478. Guljar Singh S/o Ajjit Singh R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

479. Abhijit Hudiker S/o Kishor Hudikar R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

480. Satish Kumar S/o Sevk Ram Thavani R/o Kewramunda Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

481. Premchandra S/o Sevk Ram Thavani R/o Kewramunda Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

482. Maheswar Achhary S/o Yadunath Achhary R/o Bhairamganj
Ward Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

483. Gopal Chicholker S/o Visvnath Chicholker R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

484. Niyashi Urmila Pvt. Register No.- 10, R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

485. Umesh Chandra Vore S/o Gopal Chandra Vore R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

486. Shukhmal Dhuruwa R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
39
FA No.119 of 2017

487. Smt. Nirmla Devi W/o Munidev Singh R/o Kumharpara,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

488. Mr. Madan Lal Agrwal S/o Rameswer Lal R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

489. Ramya Ram Murti S/o Ramy Papyyaya R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

490. Bhawar Lal S/o Bhajanlal Rathi R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

491. Kaveri D/o Bhajanlal Rathi R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

492. Devi Lal S/o Bhajanlal Rathi R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

493. Smt. Sheela Devi S/o Gangabishan Rathi R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

494. Smt. Devti Bai W/o Kheti Das Rathi R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

495. Pukhraj S/o Mangilal Bothra R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

496. Bhawar Lal Bothra S/o Mangilal Bothra R/o Jagdalpur,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

497. M Satynaryan S/o V M Vishvnath R/o Santoshi Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

498. S Gopal Krishna S/o V M Vishvnath R/o Santoshi Ward,
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

499. Anil Kumar Jain S/o Trilokichandra Jain R/o Pratapganj Para
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh
40
FA No.119 of 2017

500. Smt. Damyti Devi W/o Dinesh Kumar Katariya R/o
Pratapganj Para Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh,
District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

501. Shekh Mirja S/o Shekh Karim R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar,
Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

502. Devendra Jha S/o Premanad Jha R/o Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur),
Chhattisgarh

503. Gunta Mukkla Borachhari S/o Gunta Mukkla Linga R/o
Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

504. Shiv Kumar Shrivastv S/o Chhran Lal Shrivastv R/o
Hikmipara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

505. P Laxmi Patnayak W/o N Murti Patnayak R/o Bhairamganj
Ward Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

506. Maharshi Dayanad Pith Near Landing Ground, Hatkchhora,
R/o Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District :
Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

Note :- Those who have already died
and whose names have already been
deleted in the Court below have not
been impleaded as party respondent in
the instant appeal.

—- Respondent

For Appellants

 Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate with Shri Mohan Rao and
Shri Ankit Singh, Advocates

For Respondents No.1 to 4

 Shri Jitendra Singh and Shri Dhiraj Kumar, Advocates
41
FA No.119 of 2017

For Respondent No.5/State

 Shri Siddharth Dubey, Deputy Govt. Advocate

For Respondents No.9 to 11 25

 Shri HB Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Itu Rani
Mukherjee.

For Respondents No.154 155

 Shri Devershi Thakur, Advocate

For Respondents No. 156, 157, 158, 171, 194, 257, 276, 288, 317 428
 Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate

For Respondents No.495 496

 Shri Ashish Surana Shri Ankit Borkar, Advocates

For Respondent No.506

 Shri Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate

Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J

Hon’ble Smt. Vimla Singh Kapoor, J
C A V Judgment

The following judgment of the Court was passed by Prashant

Kumar Mishra, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs to assail the

legality, validity and correctness of the trial Court’s judgment

and decree whereby their suit for declaration of title and

ownership over lands and properties in schedule ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’,

‘D’, ‘E’ ‘G’ as also for setting aside the sale deeds shown in
42
FA No.119 of 2017

schedule ‘B’, ‘E’ ‘G’ of the plaint has been dismissed.

Plaintiffs’ prayer for possession of the properties in schedule

‘A’ (including schedule ‘B’), ‘E’ ‘G’ and for a decree to set

aside the judgment and decree dated 17-2-1978 in civil suit

No.2-A of 1978 of the Court of District Judge, Bastar at

Jagdalpur has also been dismissed by the trial Court.

2. The main contesting parties i.e. original plaintiff Bharat

Chandra Bhanjdeo now represented by his legal

heirs/appellants namely; (1) Smt. Krishna Kumari Devi, (2)

Kamal Chandra Bhanjdeo (3) Ku. Gayatri Devi and the

original defendants namely; (1) Smt. Hintendra Kumari Devi,

(2) Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo, (3) Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo

(4) Smt. Subhraj Kumari alias Vedvati now represented by

the respondents No.1 to 4 namely; (1) Harihar Chandra

Bhanjdeo, (2) Jyoti Kumari Bhanjdeo, (3) Mohit Chandra

Bhanjdeo (4) Kumari Juhika Bhanjdeo are related to each

other as they represent different branches of the Royal family

of erstwhile Bastar State. Their relationship and status before

the trial Court can be better understood through the following

genealogical tree (as mentioned in the memo of appeal) :
43

FA No.119 of 2017

Plaintiffs’ case:

(as projected in the plaint)

3. The suit land/properties belonged to Bastar State. The Late

Maharaja Ruler of Bastar State Shri Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo signed the merger agreement with the Government

of India (for brevity ‘the GOI’) on 15-12-1947 through an

article of agreement merging the Bastar State with the GOI on

or about 1-1-1948. Under SectionArticle 3 of the agreement Late

Maharaja Ruler was entitled to full ownership and

enjoyment of private properties as distinct from State

properties belonging to the Maharaja on the date of

agreement.

44

FA No.119 of 2017

4. On 31-3-1948 an agreement of private properties of Maharaja

Ruler of Bastar State was arrived at between the Maharaja

and the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh on behalf of the

GOI and all those properties were eventually handed over to

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo.

5. According to the plaintiffs, the private properties were saved

from being merged in the GOI, therefore, Shri Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo became owner thereof in the sense that the

properties were attached to his position as Maharaja Ruler

and, as such, these private properties was capable of

devolution on the next Maharaja. The private properties were

not the personal or self acquired properties of an individual

Ruler and for the purposes of inheritance and succession are

not governed by Hindu Law.

6. Owing to Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo Kaktiya’s

mental infirmity the Government of Madhya Pradesh issued

an order on 20-6-1953, under the approval of the GOI,

declaring him to be incapable of managing his estate and the

Court of Wards (MP) took charge of all the private properties

attached to Maharaja of Bastar. The plaintiffs further pleaded

that due to said Maharaja’s involvement in subversive

activities against the GOI by inciting disorder and rebellion
45
FA No.119 of 2017

amongst the Tribals of Bastar, an order dated 12-2-1961 was

passed by the GOI forfeiting all claims to the continued

enjoyment of his position as Maharaja Ruler of former

Bastar State and was deposed by the GOI.

7. On 12-2-1961 Shri Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo, father of the

original plaintiff was recognized by the GOI as Maharaja

Ruler of Bastar in place of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo and by

the said recognition obtained all the privileges, rights and

enjoyment to the ownership of all the private properties

belonging to the deposed Maharaja, which were saved in

favour of Ruler at the time of merger.

8. Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo died on 12-4-1970, therefore, after

his death the original plaintiff Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo was

recognized as Maharaja Ruler of Bastar vide GOI

notification dated 11-7-1970 w.e.f. 12-4-1970. The original

plaintiff, thus, obtained and became entitled to all the

privileges, rights and enjoyments and ownership of all the

private properties of the preceding Ex-Ruler.

9. At that point of time i.e. as on 12-4-1970 the plaintiff being

the minor, the defendant No.1 Smt. Hintendra Kumari Devi,

W/o Late Shri Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo, was working as his

natural guardian.

46

FA No.119 of 2017

10. It is original plaintiff’s specific case that the properties

belonging to the Bastar State, which were saved and attached

to Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo, passed on to the next

Ruler in accordance with the Gaddi custom and no other

person is entitled to receive any property, which were saved to

the Maharaja of Bastar State, therefore, upon forfeiture of the

rights of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo as a Ruler and

after he was deposed, he lost all his rights over the properties

and it came to be owned and enjoyed by the next Ruler Vijay

Chandra Bhanjdeo upon his recognition as Maharaja Ruler

of Bastar by a notification issued by the GOI. Vide

notification dated 3-5-1972 the office of Maharaja or Ruler of

Princely States were derecognized or denotified by the GOI

notification issued on the said date. Plaintiff was a

Government Ward under the provisions of Court of Wards Act

from 29-7-1972 up to 1-7-1981.

11. It was further pleaded that in 1977-78 the original defendants

No.1 to 4 conspired to deprive the plaintiff from his lawfully

acquired properties and forged a WILL purported to be

executed by Late Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo in favour of the

original defendants No.2 3 on 27-2-1964. The original

defendant No.4 filed a civil suit No.2-A of 1978 against the

original defendants No.2 3 in the Court of District Judge,
47
FA No.119 of 2017

Bastar for declaration that the alleged WILL dated 27-2-1964

is null void in respect of properties shown in schedule ‘A’.

The suit was filed on 2-2-1978 and on 16-2-1978 the original

defendant No.1 Smt. Hintendra Kumari Devi was appointed

as guardian ad litem of the original minor defendants

No.2 3.

12. The plaintiff and the defendants of the said suit moved

applications under Order 32 Rule 7 and Order 23 Rule 3 read

with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for

brevity ‘the CPC’) on 17-2-1978 along with a compromise

petition and a compromise decree was passed on the same day

in the following terms :

 LoxhZ; egkjktk izohjpanz Hkatnso dh leLr py ,oa
vpy lEifRr ij nksuksa i{kksa dk vk/kkvk/kk fgLlk
gksxkA

 nksuks i{k LoxhZ; egkjktk izohjpanz Hkatnso dh leLr
ysunkfj;k ds vk/ksvk/ks fgLlsnkj jgsaxsA

 Jherh osnorh th us tks fodz; d`f”k Hkwfe djus dk
djkj fd;k gS] mlds fodz; dh vk/kh /ku jkf’k mUgsa
Jh gfjgjpUnz Hkatnso o Jh nsos’k pUnz Hkatnso] oyh
jktekrk fgrsUnz dqekjh nsoh dk uxn Hkqxrku djuk
gksxkA tc rd Jherh osnerh th mDr vk/kh jde
Hkqxrku ugha djsxh rc rd o`Unkou cxhpk dh
lkr ,dM+ Hkwfe fodz; ugha dj ldsxhA bl lEcU/k
48
FA No.119 of 2017

esa [kkM+d?kkV oleqn ds uhps dh Hkwfe rFkk xzke
inewj] /kfu;kywj ,oa ukuxqj dh d`f”k Hkwfe ekuh
tkosxhA

 leLr utwy Hkwfe ij nksuks i{kksa dk leku vf/kdkj
jgsxkA Jherh osnorh th us ftruh utwy Hkwfe ds
fodz; dk djkj fd;k gS mruh utwy Hkwfe muds
fgLls esa lek;kstu dh tkosxh vkSj fgLlk dks cjkcj
fd;k tkosxkA

 /kerjh rglhy dh Hkwfe Jherh osnorh gh dks fn;k
x;kA

 nksuks i{kdkj vius vius ekeys tks U;k;ky; esa py
jgs gSa] mUgsa okil ys ysosaxsA

13. According to the original plaintiff, the private properties

saved in favour of Ruler Maharaja of Bastar were not his

personal or self acquired property, therefore, devolution of the

said property would not be governed under the provisions of

Hindu Law or SectionHindu Succession Act. It is for this reason all

the private properties of Ruler Maharaja of Bastar State

were devolved and succeeded by the subsequent Rulers

namely; Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo and Bharat Chandra

Bhanjdeo (original plaintiff) w.e.f. 12-4-1970. Thus, after

derecognition of Maharaja Rulers in the entire country

w.e.f. 3-5-1972 the last Ruler namely Bharat Chandra

Bhanjdeo succeeded the entire suit property and it devolved
49
FA No.119 of 2017

on him as his absolute personal properties. It is also pleaded

in para 13 (b) of the plaint that late Maharaja Vijay Chandra

Bhanjdeo was holding Vijay Bhawan situated at sheet No.81,

plot No.2/1 area 117653 sq.ft. with structures as his personal

property in his private capacity which was distinct from

private properties held by him by virtue of his being Ruler.

14. The original plaintiff challenged the compromise decree dated

17-2-1978 passed in civil suit No.2-A of 1978 on the ground

that the said decree was obtained by playing fraud as also

without impleading the original plaintiff herein, therefore, it is

not binding on him/them. The decree was obtained without

consent of the original plaintiff herein while it dealt with the

properties belonging to the Bastar State, therefore, the decree

is null void.

15. It was specifically pleaded that the judgment obtained by

fraud is null void ab initio. It was also pleaded that the

existence of WILL dated 27-2-1964 was never informed or

brought to the notice of the plaintiff albeit it dealt with

properties possessed by the next Rulers Vijay Chandra

Bhanjdeo Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo (original plaintiff) and

similarly despite pendency of several litigations before the

different forums during the life time and after the demise of
50
FA No.119 of 2017

Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo the WILL purportedly executed in

1964 was never disclosed or produced before any Court or to

the other members of the Royal family of Bastar. It was also

not known as to in whose custody the WILL was lying and

how and when the present defendants or the parties to the

civil suit No.2-A of 1978 came in possession of the same.

The attesting witnesses of the WILL belong to Dhamtari

Raipur and no reason has been shown as to why Late Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo was constrained to take attesting witnesses

from Dhamtari and Raipur. It was further pleaded that Late

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo later on bequeathed all his

properties to his wife Late Subhdra Devi.

16. Plaintiff also set up a case of execution of WILL by Late

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo in favour of his wife Subhdra Devi

on 3-11-1964 15-3-1966. Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo died on

or about 26-3-1966 and after his death Subhdra Devi became

full owner of all the moveable and immoveable properties of

Late Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo including all the suit

properties, inclusive of properties shown in schedule ‘A’ by

virtue of the WILL. It is also pleaded that alternatively Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo having no issues, after his death the entire

suit property was inherited by his widow Subhdra Devi.

Plaintiff further pleaded that Subhdra Devi bequeathed all her
51
FA No.119 of 2017

properties to the plaintiff by WILL dated 13-11-1968

registered on 14-11-1968. After death of Subhdra Devi in

1969 the plaintiff inherited all the properties on the strength of

the WILL as also by succession.

17. According to the plaintiff, the original defendant No.4 was a

concubine of Late Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo as she was not

legally married with him. Alternatively, even if the original

defendant No.4 was married to Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo the

said marriage having taken place during the life time of his

first wife Subhdra Devi, the second marriage was illegal

void.

18. Plaintiff further pleaded that on 12-10-1984 he learnt that the

original defendants No.2 to 4 with the connivance of original

defendants No.1 5 have succeeded in getting their name

recorded in the Government records on the strength of

compromise decree dated 17-2-1978 and some of the

properties mentioned in schedule ‘B’ have been sold by the

defendants No.2 to 4 without they having any valid title over

the properties. The original defendants No.8 to 493 who had

purchased the properties from the original defendants No.2 to

4 are not bona fide purchasers as they have purchased the

properties for a song and throwaway price knowing fully
52
FA No.119 of 2017

well that the defendants No.2 to 4 had no right, title or

interest.

19. It was also pleaded that old and new palace of Maharaja of

Bastar described in schedule ‘F’ are in exclusive possession of

the plaintiff. The palace premises also consist of houses,

buildings, garages and vacant plots. The defendants No.2 to 4

are in occupation of new palace as licencees of the plaintiff

who is in actual physical possession of old palace with all the

superstructures, out houses, garages, buildings and premises

adverse to and to the exclusion of the defendants No.1 to 4.

20. In respect of property called Mundi Dongari, khasra No.148,

area 33.36 acres, it was pleaded that the same was allotted by

the Government of Madhya Pradesh to Late Maharaja Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo at the time of merger agreement between

him, Government of Madhya Pradesh and the GOI. The

defendants No.1, 3 4 have also got recorded their names

stealthily without consent, knowledge or notice to the

plaintiff. There are movables like rifles, 12 bore guns, pistols,

revolvers, swords, etc. described in schedule ‘C’, which are

kept in Jagdalpur Treasury under the custody of the State

Government. Ornaments and Jewelers belonging to the

Maharaja Ruler of Bastar described in schedule ‘D’ are also
53
FA No.119 of 2017

kept in Jagdalpur Treasury in the custody of the State

Government. Plaintiff is entitled to receive the moveables

described in schedule ‘C’ ‘D’. The plaintiff had applied for

delivery of these articles on 30-10-1986 before the Collector,

Bastar. The Government of Madhya Pradesh (now

Chhattisgarh) is also ready and prepared to deliver the same to

the original owner, but the defendants have raised

unnecessary dispute.

21. Similarly, agricultural lands situated at villages Dhainaloor,

Ghat Padmoor, Nangoor, Jagdalpur, Sumund and Sihawa

Nagri, Panchgaon in Dhamtari Tashil also belong to the

plaintiff and they have been illegally and unlawfully included

in the compromise decree passed in civil suit No.2-A of 1978.

The plaintiff is also entitled to the said lands.

22. The plaintiff further averred that the defendants No.2 to 4

have sold the properties shown in Schedule ‘E’ to one

Trilochan Singh and the defendant No.2 executed the gift

deed on 24-3-1982 gifting 1/5th of Vijay Bhawan to defendant

No.313 Vidhiya Sagar Tiwari in an unlawful and illegal

manner, therefore, the said deeds are void and not binding on

the plaintiff. It is also pleaded that property named Rani

Gadia is in the exclusive possession of the plaintiff, therefore,
54
FA No.119 of 2017

he is entitled to the said property. Similarly, the defendant

No.4 has illegally gifted away vacant plot No.1/1 sheet No.98

to the defendant No.3 vide gift deed dated 7-3-1980, which is

void and not binding on the plaintiff. Sale deeds executed by

the defendants No.2 to 4 for the property mentioned in

schedule ‘G’ to Maharani Dhyan Vidhiya Peeth, defendant

No.395, is also void and not binding on the plaintiff.

23. In the alternative, plaintiff also pleaded that if the properties

are found to be private properties of Late Maharaja Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo then the same having devolved on his

widow Smt. Subhadra Devi and the defendant No.4 by

succession or inheritance then the plaintiff is entitled to half

share by virtue of WILL executed by Subhadra Devi.

24. According to the plaintiff he had no knowledge of the sale

deeds shown in schedule ‘B’, ‘E’ ‘G’ by the defendants No.2

to 4, which came to his notice on 12-10-1984 when he

became aware of the judgment and decree dated 17-2-1978 in

civil suit No.2-A of 1978. The plaintiff also learnt about

various alienations by the defendants No.2 to 4 from time to

time from January, 1985. The plaintiff, therefore, prayed for

declaration of title and ownership of the properties shown in

schedule ‘A’ (including schedule ‘B’), ‘C’, ‘D”, ‘E’ ‘G’ and in
55
FA No.119 of 2017

the alternative declaration and possession as prayed in paras

34 35 of the plaint and for setting aside the sales shown in

schedule ‘B’, ‘E’ ‘G’. Specific prayer has been made by the

plaintiff for setting aside the judgment and decree dated

17-2-1978 in civil suit No.2-A of 1978 of the Court of District

Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur.

Defendants’ case :

25. The original defendants No.1 to 3 namely; Smt. Hitendra

Kumari Devi, Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo and Devesh

Chandra Bhanjdeo did not file any written statement. It was

only the original defendant No.4 Smt. Subhraj Kumari alias

Vedvati who filed her written statement admitting the list of

private properties prepared at the time of vesting of the state

properties in the dominion of India. She also admitted that

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was entitled to full

ownership and exclusive enjoyment of the private properties,

which, according to her, had the characteristic of separate or

self acquired property under the Hindu Law. Defendant No.4

denied that the private properties were in the nature of

properties held by a ruler and would devolve on the next

Ruler on the death of the recognised Ruler. According to her,

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was entitled to lawful
56
FA No.119 of 2017

transfer of the private properties and on his death the said

properties were heritable by his legal heirs.

26. It was specifically pleaded by the defendant No.4 that in lieu

of vesting with the dominion of India the Central Government

had sanctioned a privy purse. The privy purse was to be

granted to the succeeding Ruler on the death of his former

recognised Ruler. She denied that Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo took possession of his private properties in his

capacity as Maharaja with further pleading that the private

properties were his personal and absolute properties.

27. The defendant No.4 further denied that Maharaja Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo was incapable or that he had mental

infirmity or incapacity. According to this defendant the

erstwhile Madhya Pradesh Government’s decision to take the

properties of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo for

management by Court of Ward was politically motivated.

However, the private properties were later released from the

Superintendence of the Court of Ward.

28. Defendant No.4 admitted that Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo’s recognition as a Ruler was withdrawn and Vijay

Chandra was recognised as a Ruler, however, she denied that

on being recognised as Ruler Vijay Chandra got any right or
57
FA No.119 of 2017

interest over the private properties of Maharaja Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo. Vijay Chandra was entitled to privy purse

of Rs.1,50,000/- per year. It is further denied by this

defendant No.4 that consequent to recognition of Vijay

Chandra as a Ruler all properties saved from the merger

agreement belonged to him. She would specifically plead that

properties vested in Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo could

not be divested for vesting in Vijay Chandra.

29. Plea of limitation was raised by the defendant No.4 saying

that the cause of action arose on 12-2-1961 for which civil

suit No.3-A of 1964 was filed, which was dismissed for want

of prosecution on 16-7-1975, however, before that Vijay

Chandra died on 12-4-1970. It was further pleaded that the

plaintiff not being the recognised Ruler at the time of

institution of suit, he would destroy his own right to sue

based on the principle that the property belongs to and is

succeeded by the next Ruler. Forgery of WILL was also

denied. She would specifically state that Maharaja Pravir

Chandra Bhanjdeo died issueless. The Defendant No.4 being

his widow was the only nearest legal heir to inherit the estate

of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo, therefore, she applied

for mutation. However, the defendants No.1, 2 3 published

a notice in the daily newspaper on 2-1-1978 that deceased
58
FA No.119 of 2017

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo has executed a WILL

dated 27-2-1964 in their favour bequeathing all his personal

properties. On 7-1-1978 Smt. Hitendra Kumari submitted a

copy of the said WILL before the Nazul Officer and objected

to mutation application filed by the defendant No.4.

30. The defendant No.4 further pleaded that the WILL relied by

the defendants No.1, 2 3 being forged she preferred civil

suit No.2-A of 1978 to declare the above said WILL dated

27-2-1964 to be a forged document. Since the civil suit would

have taken long time for adjudication and considering the

close relation between the parties, the defendant No.4 and

Harihar Chandra with Devesh Chandra represented by their

legal guardian (as they were minor) compromised the suit

with the permission of the Court. It was denied that the

plaintiff has any claim, right or entitlement in the private

property of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo. The

defendant No.4 would aver that compromise decree petition

was absolutely honest and lawful not being collusive neither

with an intention to deprive the plaintiff of his right over the

properties. She also denied that Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo executed any WILL in favour of Subhadra Devi.

She even denied that Subhadra Devi was the wife of Maharaja

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo. Execution of WILL dated
59
FA No.119 of 2017

3-11-1964 and 15-3-1966 by Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo in favour of Subhadra Devi was denied being

forged document. Consequently, Subhadra Devi became the

owner of the properties of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo

was also illegal.

31. Defendant No.4 also denied execution and existence of WILL

dated 13-11-1968 allegedly executed by Subhadra Devi with

alternative submission that otherwise also Subhadra Devi had

no title or possession of any of the suit property to transfer in

favour of any other person and further that before her death

on 27-11-1968, she was seriously ill for about a month. This

defendant denied that she was the concubine of Maharaja

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo. According to her she was married

with Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo on 4-7-1961 at New

Delhi according to Hindu religious rites. On the request of

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo the Court of Ward was

paying this defendant a monthly allowance of Rs.1,000/- and

after death of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo the said

allowance was continued by the Union Government. She

denied that there exists judicial separation between Maharaja

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo and the defendant No.4 with

pleading that it was a decree for maintenance under the Hindu

Adoptions and SectionMaintenance Act and not for judicial
60
FA No.119 of 2017

separation and hence marital status of the defendant No.4 with

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo cannot be questioned.

32. The defendant No.4 denied that the defendants No.8 to 493

are not bona fide purchasers for value. These defendants have

purchased the property after verifying and satisfying with the

revenue records. It was specifically contended that the palace

was the personal property of Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo and had gifted the bungalow to Vijay Chandra for

his residence, therefore, even after his recognition as Ruler

Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo continued to reside in the same

bungalow and not in the Palace. The list of private properties

of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo includes the palace and

also the neighbouring building Rani Gadia. When Maharaja

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was killed in police firing in 1966

Justice Pande Enquiry Commission locked and sealed the

palace which was later on opened by the Collector and

allowed the entry of Vijay Chandra. Thus, the defendant

admits the possession of Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo in the

palace and Rani Gadia.

33. The defendant No.4 further admitted that Mundi Dongri area

of 33.36 acres was allotted to Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo as per the merger agreement, however, according to
61
FA No.119 of 2017

this defendant, after death of Maharaja Pravir Chandra

Bhanjdeo her name was mutated over the revenue record

concerning Mundi Dongri. Similarly for the properties

described in schedule ‘C and the jewelery, plaintiff’s title was

denied. The defendant No.4 along with the defendants No.2

3 have made joint claim before the Government in respect of

jewelery and arms on which the Government has passed an

order in their favour and the plaintiff signed the indemnity

bond before the Collector, Bastar, agreeing with the said

order, therefore, this defendant claimed joint ownership of the

arms and jewelery along with the defendants No.2 3.

34. The claim of the plaintiff about the agricultural land, as

pleaded in para 27 of the plaint, has been denied by the

defendant No.4. She also denied execution of sale deeds by

the defendants No.1 to 4 at different point of time. She

specially admits in para 31 that she was in possession of Rani

Gadia. Sale deed executed in favour of Maharshi Dhyan

Vidya Peeth was also pleaded to be a bona fide sale. Claim

for setting aside the compromise decree has been denied

saying that the said decree is valid and lawful.

35. She would also plead that a recognised Ruler has no right to

claim separate property of the predecessor Ruler. Maharaja
62
FA No.119 of 2017

Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was in exclusive possession and

enjoyment of properties allotted to him by the Government in

1948. The plaintiff did not continue the suit preferred by

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo after his death, therefore,

the plaintiff has no locus standi to claim the properties of

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo. Defendant No.4 further

stated that in so far as the lands involved in the sale deeds are

concerned the suit for mere declaration is not maintainable

and further that the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem

Court fees for the lands for which possession is sought. By

way of special pleadings the defendant No.4 pleaded that the

suit concerning the compromise decree dated 17-2-1978

rendered in civil suit No.2-A/1978 is barred by limitation as

also the claim for possession of the properties described in

schedule ‘A’ (including schedule ‘B’), ‘E’ ‘G’ is barred by

limitation.

36. Other defendants filed the written statements in groups or

individually. The sum and substance of the defence raised by

the aforesaid defendants, in addition to the defence raised by

main contesting defendant No.4, is that they are bona fide

purchasers for value paid and the purchases made by them

were after due enquiry from the Government records, which

contained the name of the defendant No.1 or the defendants
63
FA No.119 of 2017

No.2 to 4 as owner. Thus, according to them, even if the

defendants No.2 to 4 be ostensible owner they could pass

valid title by sale to the purchaser defendants.

Issues :

37. On the basis of pleadings of the parties the trial Court framed

as many as 42 issues for adjudication and after trial recorded

the following findings on material issues :

 Trial Court found that Subhadra Devi was legally
married wife of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo and that
Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo has executed WILL in her
favour. (Issue Nos.2, 3 6)

 Trial Court further found that the plaintiff is not entitled
to a decree for declaration of his title or possession over
the suit land. (Issue Nos.1, 5 10)

 Trial Court also found that the plaintiff cannot be
declared owner of half share of the properties of Pravir
Chandra Bhanjdeo on the basis of WILL executed by
Subhadra Devi in his favour. (Issue No.4)

 Trial Court found that there is no proof that there was
judicial separation between Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo
and the defendant No.4 Vedwati and further that the
plaintiff is not entitled to either 1/4th or 1/5th share nor
the sale deeds executed in favour of purchaser
defendants can be declared illegal. (Issue Nos.7 to 9)
64
FA No.119 of 2017

 In issue Nos.12 13, trial Court held that the suit is
neither barred by limitation nor it suffers from
misjoinder of causes of action, however, while deciding
the issue No.14 it held that suit suffers from res
judicata, but contrary to this while deciding the issue
No.16, the trial Court held that the suit is not barred
under Order 9 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 (for short ‘the CPC’) or Order 2 Rule 2 of the CPC.

 While deciding issue Nos.17 18 the trial Court held
that the suit is valued properly and proper adequate
Court fees has been paid.

 While deciding the issue No.19 the trial Court held that
the suit is maintainable against many defendants
challenging the sales in their favour.

 In respect of Mundi Dongari land the trial Court found
that it was the private property of Pravir Chandra
Bhanjdeo. (Issue No.20)

 While deciding the issue No.21 the trial Court held that
the land of Mundi Dongari was not succeeded by
defendant No.4 after death of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo.

 In respect of plaint schedule ‘C’ while deciding the issue
Nos.23A 23B the trial Court held that the suit lands
were not the personal property of Pravir Chandra
Bhanjdeo and the plaintiff did not succeed the same.
Similar is the finding in respect of jewelery (issue
No.24)
65
FA No.119 of 2017

 Title of the defendants No.2 to 4 over the jewelery was
decided against them in issue No.25 and the defendants
plea that plaintiff had consented to the Government
decision of handing over the jewelery to the defendants
No.2 to 4 has been decided against the said defendants
in issue No.26.

38. Consequent to the above findings the trial Court has

dismissed the suit.

39. The Plaintiffs have preferred the present appeal challenging

the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court dismissing

their suit, however, no cross appeal or cross objection has

been filed by any of the defendants to challenge the findings

recorded by the trial Court adverse to their interest.

Submission of plaintiffs/Appellants :

40. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the

appellants/plaintiffs, would submit that :

 The original plaintiff was the successor of Ruler of

Bastar State under the Gaddi custom. After death of

original plaintiff Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo, plaintiff

No.3 Kamal Chand Bhanjdeo has succeeded as Ruler of

Bastar State under the said custom.

66

FA No.119 of 2017

 Referring to Ex.P/68, an order passed by the concerned

Ministry of the Government of India, learned counsel

would submit that there is distinction between private

properties of the Ruler and his personal or self acquired

properties. The private properties attached to Ruler

would, therefore, pass on to their successor

intact and, as such, plaintiffs are entitled to be declared

owner of all the private properties of the Ruler of Bastar

State.

 Defendants No.2 to 4 had sold the properties on the

basis of compromise decree dated 17-3-1978 passed in

civil suit No.2-A/1978 which was obtained by fraud

without impleading the original plaintiff or his legal

heirs. The judgment obtained by playing fraud is void

ab initio, therefore, the purchaser defendants in whose

favour sale deeds have been executed by the defendants

No.2 to 4 would not derive any title as the sale deeds

would also be tainted with fraud.

 The trial Court having held while deciding issue No.21

that the defendant No.4 has no title over the suit

properties, it should have instantly set aside the sale

deeds executed by the defendant No.4. The impugned
67
FA No.119 of 2017

judgment and decree, thus, suffer from self-

contradiction.

 The earlier suit preferred by Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo

having been dismissed for want of prosecution it can

never operate as res judicata.

 Referring to the decision of the High Court of Allahabad

in Miss Talat Fatima Hasan v His Highness Nawab

Syed Murtaza Ali Khan Sahib Bahadur and Others 1,

learned counsel would submit that the rule of succession

in respect of the Gaddi of Bastar State along with

properties would pass on according to the rule of male

lineal primogeniture, according to which the eldest male

heir of the late ruler inherited both the Gaddi and the

properties, and the properties had an impartible

character.

 According to learned counsel in view of applicability of

Gaddi system the respondents’ argument that the

properties would devolve as per the provisions of the

SectionHindu Succession Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act, 1956’) is

unsustainable.

1 AIR 1997 All 122
68
FA No.119 of 2017

 The plaintiff having valued the suit properly; paid

adequate Court fees; and having also prayed for delivery

of possession of the properties, which are not in his

possession, the suit should have been decreed in its

entirety.

 The purchaser defendants having not laid any

foundation to substantiate the plea of bona fide

purchaser they are not entitled for the benefit of Section

41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short ‘the

SectionTP Act’).

 Learned counsel would oppose the application filed by

the defendants No.1 to 4 under Order 41 Rule 27 of the

CPC. He would submit that in one of the public

document filed along with this application it is

mentioned that Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was suffering

from mental defect, therefore, the alleged WILL

executed by Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo in favour of the

defendants No.2 3 becomes suspicious.

 Except the purchaser Brajesh Bajpai (Defendant No.10)

all other purchasers were proceeded ex parte and have

not led any evidence. In the absence of they having led

evidence, there is no foundation by these defendants to
69
FA No.119 of 2017

challenge the maintainability of the suit on the ground

of limitation, which is always a mixed question of law

and fact.

 Learned counsel would refer to the documents filed

under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC to mention

that names of the parties are jointly recorded, therefore,

the suit cannot be thrown out on the ground of

limitation.

 Shri Rajeev Shrivastava wold refer to Section 5 of the

Act, 1956 to argue that succession of the private

property of the Ruler is not governed under the

provisions of the Act, 1956.

 According to the learned counsel at one point of time

the defendants No.1 to 4 would claim title on the basis

of WILL but at some other places they would refer to

the Act, 1956 and similarly earlier they referred to the

properties of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo as private

property, but later they have argued that it was the

personal property. Thus, there is deviation from the

stand taken in the written statement and they are

estopped from arguing that the suit property is the

personal property of Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo.
70

FA No.119 of 2017

Submission of defendants :

41. Shri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel appearing

for the respondents No.1 to 4, Per contra, would submit

that :

 Rule of male lineal primogeniture is not applicable on

the Rulers of Princely states after abolition of Privy

Purse. Learned counsel would place reliance on

Ahmadunnisa Begum v Union of India represented by

Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of

India, New Delhi2 and Kunwar Shri Vir Rajendra

Singh v The Union of India and Others3.

 There is no pleading of fraud vis-a-vis judgment and

decree dated 17-2-1978 passed in Civil Suit No.

2-A/1978.

 Plaintiffs have not challenged the WILL dated

27-2-1964 executed by Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo in

favour of the defendants No.2 3, therefore, the said

properties are owned by the said defendants.

 To buttress the aforesaid contention, learned counsel

would place reliance upon the decision rendered by the

2 AIR 1969 AP 423
3 AIR 1970 SC 1946
71
FA No.119 of 2017

Supreme Court in Union of India v Ibrahim Uddin and

Another4.

42. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned senior counsel appearing for the

respondents No.9 to 11 25, would submit that :

 Jagdalpur being a scheduled area permission under

Section 165 of the MP/Chhattisgarh Land Revenue

Code, 1959 (for short ‘the Code, 1959’) was required to

be sought, however, there is no material as to whether

the plaintiff has sought such permission.

 Separate suit should have been filed for each of the sale

deed and such suit has to be filed within three years

from the date of execution of sale deed.

43. Shri Arvind Shrivastava, Shri Ashish Surana, Shri Devershi

Thakur Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, learned counsel

appearing for some of the respondents/defendants, would

adopt the arguments raised by Shri Jitendra Singh, learned

counsel for the respondents No.1 to 4. They would submit

that the suit is barred by limitation. They would refer to the

provisions of Section 41 of the TP Act.

4 (2012) 8 SCC 148
72
FA No.119 of 2017

Discussion :

44. Before proceeding to discuss the merits of the appeal, we

shall first take up the respondents’ application under Order

41 Rule 27 of the CPC for consideration. The documents

filed along with the application are certified copies of

public documents. They are related to the subject matter

of the dispute, therefore, the application is allowed

45. The most crucial question around which the dispute revolves

and the law would be required to be applied is the nature of

property and the terms under which it was settled in the hands

of Ex-Ruler at the time of merger, therefore, we shall first

advert to the documentary evidence on this issue.

46. At the time of independence by virtue of provisions contained

in the Indian Independence Act, 1947 the independent

Dominion known as “INDIA” was formed and Ruler of an

existing Indian State within the Dominion of India was

required to sign the Instrument of Accession. The Maharaja

of Bastar Shri Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo Kakatiya, Ruler of

Bastar State signed the Instrument of Accession vide Ex.P/80.

This Instrument stipulated that any reference in this

Instrument to the Maharaja or to the Ruler of the State is to be
73
FA No.119 of 2017

considered as including a reference to his heirs and

successors.

47. At the time of merger Rulers of each of the State executed

merger agreement as also covenants. The agreement between

Maharaja of Bastar State and the Governor General of India

was executed on 15-12-1947 vide Ex.P/88C. It contains five

(5) Articles, which are reproduced hereunder :

AGREEMENT MADE THIS fifteenth day of
December 1947 between the Governor General of
India and the Maharaja of Bastar State.
WHEREAS in the immediate interests of the
State and its people, the Maharaja of Bastar State
is desirous that the administration of the State
should be integrated as early as possible with that
of the Central Provinces and Berar in such
manner as the Government of the Dominion of
India may think fit;

It is hereby agreed as follows :-

SectionARTICLE 1
The Maharaja of Bastar State hereby cedes to the
Dominion Government full and exclusive
authority, jurisdiction and powers for and in
relation to the governance of the State and agrees
to transfer the administration of the State to the
Dominion Government on the 1st day of January
1948 ( hereinafter referred to as “the said day”).

74

FA No.119 of 2017

As from the said day the Dominion Government
will be competent to exercise the said powers,
authority and jurisdiction in such manner and
through such agency as it may think fit.

SectionARTICLE 2
The Maharaja shall with effect from the said day
be entitled to receive from the revenues of the
State annually for his privy purse the sum of Two
Hundred and Ten/- rupees /Thousand One
Hundred free of taxes. This amount is intended
to cover all the expenses of the Ruler and his
family, including expenses on account of his
personal staff, maintenance of his residences,
marriages and other ceremonies, etc. and will
neither be increased nor reduced for any reason
whatsoever.

The said sum may be drawn by the Maharaja in
four equal installments in advance at the
beginning of each quarter by presenting bills at
the State Treasury or at such other Treasury as
may be specified by the Dominion Government.

SectionARTICLE 3
The Maharaja shall be entitled to the full
ownership, use and enjoyment of all private
properties (as distinct from State properties)
belonging to him on the date of this
agreement.

The Maharaja will furnish to the Dominion
Government before the 1st day of January 1948 an
inventory of all the immovable property,
75
FA No.119 of 2017

securities and cash balance held by him as such
private property.

If any dispute arises as to whether any item of
property is the private property of the Maharaja
or State property, it shall be referred to such
officer with judicial experience as the Dominion
Government may nominate and the decision of
that officer shall be final and binding on both
parties.

SectionARTICLE 4
The Maharaja, the Maharani, the Rajmata, the
Yuvaraja and the Yuvarani shall be entitled to all
personal privileges enjoyed by them whether
within or outside the territories of the State,
immediately before the 15th day of August 1947.

SectionARTICLE 5
The Dominion Government guarantees the
succession, according to law and custom, to the
gadi of the State and to the Maharaja’s personal
rights, privileges, dignities and titles.

In confirmation whereof Mr. Vapal Pangunni
Menon, Secretary to the Government of India in
the Ministry of States, has appended his signature
on behalf and with the authority of the Governor-
General of India and Pravir Chandra Bhanj Deo
Kaktiya Maharaja of Bastar State has appended
his signature on behalf of himself, his heirs and
successors.

76

FA No.119 of 2017

48. SectionArticle 1 above contains recital of ceding of the Bastar State

with the Dominion Government w.e.f. 1-1-1948. SectionArticle 2

speaks about the Maharaja’s entitlement to privy purse.

49. SectionArticle 3, relevant for the purpose of suit, provides that the

Maharaja shall be entitled to the full ownership, use and

enjoyment of all private properties (as distinct from State

properties) belonging to him on the date of agreement. Under

this Article, the Maharaja was required to furnish to the

Dominion Government an inventory of all the immovable

property, securities and cash balance held by him as such

private property with further stipulation that if any dispute

arises as to whether any item of property is the private

property of the Maharaja or State property, the same shall be

referred to such officer with judicial experience as the

Dominion Government may nominate and the decision of that

officer shall be final and binding on both parties. SectionArticle 4 is

about entitlement of the Maharaja, the Maharani, the Rajmata,

the Yuvraja and Yuvrani to all personal privileges enjoyed by

them whether within or outside the territories of the State

immediately before 15-8-1947.

50. SectionArticle 5 contains recital about the recognition of gadi of the

State. It says that the Dominion Government guarantees the
77
FA No.119 of 2017

succession, according to law and custom, to the gadi of the

State and to the Maharaja’s personal rights, privileges,

dignities and titles.

51. At the time of merger Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was

the Ruler of Bastar State. By notification dated 20-5-1953

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was declared to be

incapable of managing his estate owing to mental infirmity.

Consequent to the said notification of the Government of

India, the Government of Madhya Pradesh issued a

communication dated 20-6-1953 (Ex.P/77) in exercise of

powers contained in Sections 4 and 41 of the Central

Provinces Court of Wards Act, 1899 according sanction to the

assumption of superintendence of the estate of the said

Maharaja by the Court of Wards, Bastar.

52. Later, by notification dated 12-2-1961 (Ex.P/86), published in

the Gazette of India, Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo, was

declared ceased to be recognised as the Ruler of Bastar State

and in his place his brother, Yurraj Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo

Kakatiya, was recognised as the Ruler of Bastar. Thereafter,

by notification dated 11-7-1970 issued by the President in

exercise of powers under SectionArticle 366 of the Constitution of

India Maharaja Bharat Chandra Bhanjdeo Kakatiya, the
78
FA No.119 of 2017

original plaintff, was recognised as Ruler of Bastar w.e.f.

12-4-1970 in succession to Late Maharaja Vijay Chandra

Bhanjdeo Kakatiya, who died on 12-4-1970. This notification

was published in the Gazette of India on 25-7-1970

(Ex.P/87C).

53. Soon after the accession, dispute arose amongst the members

of erstwhile family and their heirs or successors, as the case

may be, as to the ownership of private properties, personal

properties or self acquired properties, therefore, the

Government of India, Ministry of State wrote to the State of

Madhya Pradesh clarifying the legal position stating that the

Rulers are not entitled to dispose of their private properties for

their own advantage and that the private properties vested in

them in their capacity as Rulers should pass to their

successors intact. The above ruling of the GOI, MoS was

communicated by the State of Madhya Pradesh to all Rulers

of States merged in MP vide its communication issued some

time in the month of October, 1954 (Ex.P/68). The contents

of the letter being relevant and important it is reproduced

hereunder :

In connection with the question regarding the
disposal of their private properties by the Rulers,
the Government of India, Ministry of State have
ruled that the properties, which have been declared
79
FA No.119 of 2017

as the private properties of the Rulers, as
distinguished from their “personal” or self acquired
properties, vest in them, in their capacity as Rulers
and should pass to their successors intact. The
Rulers are not, therefore, entitled to dispose of their
private properties for their own advantage. If any
Ruler finds it necessary to dispose of any of his
private properties, he should state the facts to the
State Government concerned and obtain their
approval. The proceeds of the property so permitted
to be sold cannot however be appropriated by the
Ruler himself but should be kept intact for his
successor.

I am, therefore, to request you that the above ruling
of the Government of India may kindly be kept in
view and that the approval of State Government
may kindly be sought whenever you desire to
dispose of any of your private properties.

(Emphasis supplied)

54. The above letter of the Government of Madhya Pradesh

stating about the ruling of the GOI would therefore declare in

no uncertain terms that the private properties vested in the

Ruler in their capacity as Rulers should pass to their

successors intact. The original plaintiff was therefore entitled

to succeed not only to Gaddi by virtue of SectionArticle 5 of the

agreement (Ex.P/88C), but also to the private properties of

the Ruler of Bastar.

55. After Maharaja Pravir Chanra Bhanjdeo was derecognised as

Ruler of Bastar a dispute arose as to the ownership of new and

old palaces, which were shown as the private property of

Maharaja at the time of Accession, therefore, by
80
FA No.119 of 2017

communication dated 21-5-1966 issued by the Government of

Madhya Pradesh addressed to the Commissioner, Raipur

Division. It was informed that the present Ruler should be

regarded as the owner of the palace at Jagdalpur with its

appurtenances. By subsequent communication of the

Collector, Bastar, dated 24-2-1967 addressed to the

Commissioner, Raipur Division regarding handing over the

property of the deceased Ruler to the present Maharaja of

Bastar, it was informed that the old and new Palaces have

been handed over to the present Ruler on 4-2-1967. The letter

also stated that all silver and golden ornaments, cheque books

and important documents which were found in both the

palaces have been deposited in the district treasury.

56. By memorandum dated 4-12-1952 the Government of

Madhya Pradesh informed the Deputy Commissioner, Bastar,

Jagdalpur, regarding handing over private property of the

Maharaja of Bastar. The memorandum dated 4-12-1952 is

reproduced hereunder :

GOVERNMENT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Political And Military Department

MEMORANDUM
81
FA No.119 of 2017

No. 4372-559/ST, Dated, Nagpur, the 4th Decr. 1952.

To
The Deputy Commissioner,
Bastar, Jagdalpur.

Sub. :- Private Property of the Maharaja of Bastar Handing Over of.
Ref. :- Correspondence resting with your telegram dated the 25 th July,
1952.

The State Government are pleased to direct that the following
items of property allowed to the Maharaja of Bastar as his private
property in the agreement regarding inventory reached between the
Maharaja of Bastar and the Chief Minister and approved by the
Government of India should be handed over to the Maharaja of Bastar
subject to the conditions mentioned against them:-

Serial Item of property Conditions
No.
1. Rest House at Amravati Nil
in Kondgaon Tahsil
2. New place site situate at Nil
the Sargipal Reserve.
3. Two sheds in Subject to the condition
Gangamunda for giving that they are allowed to be
Shelter to the aboriginals used as before for
on the Deshera festival. sheltering aboriginals who
came to Jagdalpur for
litigation, ceremonies, etc.
4. Halba-kote Mango tope Nil
(near the landing ground)
5. Brindaban Mango Tope Nil
6. Khadakghat Mango Tope Nil
7. Khadakghat Coconut Nil
Garden
8. Hikmipara Orange Nil
Garden
9. Hikmipara Mango Tope Nil
10. Pan Garden near the Nil
Power House.

11. The Rest House at Nil
Bailadila

12. The Shed in Kumhrakote Subject to the condition
village where Bahar that they are made
Raini festival during available as before to the
Dashera is being held. aboringinals during
82
FA No.119 of 2017

With an area of about 4 Dashera every year and
acres around it. that they will be liable to
be resumed on breach of
this condition.

13. The lands below the Nil
Samundar Tank Bund.
14. Hikmipara Mango Subject to the condition
Garden. that the Sunday Market is
allowed to be held there as
before.
15. The Palace. Nil

Orders on items 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Statement ‘B’ enclosed with your D.O.
N.. SC/127 of 1952, dated the 28th June 1952 will be communicated in
due course.

In the agreement regarding inventory, the Maharaja’s claim to three
trucks and a Fort Mercury Car was accepted. Please report whether
these vehicles have once been handed over to the Maharaja. If not,
please report the particulars regarding make, numbers, etc. of the
vehicles which would go to the Maharaja according the –

——————————————– agreement so that orders for their
handing over could be issued.

By order of the Governor,
Madhya Pradesh,
K. Krishnan,
Under secretary to Government,
Madhya Pradesh, Political and Military Department.

57. As against each of the private property mentioned in Ex.P/82

above, conditions were imposed for some properties. For the

two sheds in Gangamunda for giving shelter to the aboriginals

on the Deshera festival with further condition that they are

allowed to be used as before for sheltering aboriginals who

came to Jagdalpur for litigation, ceremonies, etc. As against

the property mentioned at S.No.12 a condition was imposed

that they are made available as before to the aboriginals
83
FA No.119 of 2017

during Deshera every year and that they will be liable to be

resumed on breach of this condition.

In respect of Hikmipara Mango Garden a condition was

imposed that the Sunday market is allowed to be held there as

before. It is also mentioned that orders on certain items

mentioned in statement ‘B’ shall be communicated in due

course. By another communication dated 3-11-1954

(Ex.P/79) Maharaja’s claim for inclusion of Panchgaon Nagri

situated in Dhamtari in the list of inventory agreement was

admitted. Maharaja’s claim to the arrears of income which

accrued from the said villages was also allowed and a sum of

Rs.88,951/- was credited to the revenue of the former Bastar

State prior to integration.

58. By another communication dated 2-8-1956 two more

properties namely; Rest House at Amravati in Kondagaon

Tahsil area 0.76 acres in Makdi Revenue Forest and New

Palace site situated at the Sarjinal Reserve Forest Area, area

33.36 acres together with the trees, etc. standing on the sites

were directed to be handed over to the Maharaja of Bastar as

his private property.

59. The condition imposed on user/enjoyment of some of the

properties conferring rights on the tribals or holding of
84
FA No.119 of 2017

Sunday market would again make it explicit that if the private

properties were not the properties attached to Gaddi, such

conditions could not have been imposed upon its user. This

condition necessarily implies that the properties shall pass on

to the successor Rulers intact with the conditions attached.

Reading it otherwise would make the properties partible being

available for disposal violating the rights of tribals or the

public at large for holding markets, etc. If the property is

treated to be available for distribution amongst the legal heirs

of Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo, these properties on

which the conditions have been attached would also become

the personal property of the legal heirs. This does not appears

to be the intention of the GOI at any point of time to deprive

the tribals of Bastar of their customary rights attached to some

of the private properties of the Ruler.

60. The documents discussed above and the pleadings of the

parties as well, would lead us to an indisputable fact that the

properties involved in the present suit were private properties

of the Maharaja of Bastar.

61. While the plaintiff/appellant contends that rule of impartibility

and primogeniture applies to the private properties of the

Maharaja, the respondent/defendants would contend
85
FA No.119 of 2017

otherwise. Plaintiff/appellant also contends that applying the

rule of Lineal Male Primogeniture to the Gaddi of Bastar

State, the eldest male heir of the Ruler inherits both Gaddi

and properties. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to succeed

on this count alone. On the contrary, the respondents/

defendants claim to derive title by applying the ordinary

law/Municipal law relating to succession and the compromise

decree passed by the District Judge, Bastar on 17-2-1978 in

civil suit No.2-A/1978.

Case Laws :

62. The issue as to whether rule of primogeniture would apply to

the Gaddi and the property of the former Ruler was the

subject matter of adjudication in cases decided by some of the

High Courts and the Supreme Court as well. We shall now

discuss the case law as infra :

63. In Vishnu Partap Singh v State of Madhya Pradesh and

Others5 the Supreme Court observed thus in para 5 (pg. 46) :

5. Despite the distinction drawn in Article XI,
there was in reality no distinction between State
property and the property privately owned by a
Ruler, since the Ruler was the owner of all the
property in the State. For the purposes of
arrangement of finance, however, such a
distinction was practically being observed by all

5 1990 (Supp) SCC 43
86
FA No.119 of 2017

Rulers. The apparent effect of the covenant was
that all the property in the State vested in the
United State of Vindhya Pradesh except private
property which was to remain with the Rulers. As
is evident, the Ruler was required under Article
XI to furnish to the Raj Pramukh before May 1,
1948 an inventory of all immovable properties,
securities and cash balances held by him as such
private property. Conceivably, on a dispute
arising as to whether any item of property was or
was not the private property of the Ruler and
hence state property, it was required to be
referred to a Judicial Officer to be nominated by
the Government of India and the decision of that
officer was to be final and binding on all parties
concerned. Despite the stern language of Article
XI, requiring a Ruler to furnish the list of his
private properties by May 1, 1948, the covenant
did not contain any clause or article providing
penal consequences which would or were likely
to follow in the event of a Ruler not furnishing
the list of private properties before that date.
Nothing is available in the covenant and none
was pointed out to us that if a Ruler failed to
furnish an inventory of his private properties
before May 1, 1948, he was debarred from
furnishing it at a later stage and that failure of his
part had the effect of divesting him of title to his
private properties.

(Emphasis supplied)

64. In Revathinnal Balagopala Varma v His Highness Shri

Padmanabha Dasa Bala Rama Varma (since deceased) and

Others6 the Supreme Court held thus in paras 64 67 :

64. If someone asserts that to a particular
property held by a sovereign the legal incidents
of sovereignty do not apply, it will have to be
pleaded and established by him that the said
property was held by the sovereign not as a
sovereign but in some other capacity…..

6     1993 Supp (1) SCC 233
87
FA No.119 of 2017

67. The properties in suit having passed on
from one sovereign to the other came to be
ultimately held by Respondent No. 1 in that
capacity. Neither any principle nor authority nor
even any grant etc. has been brought to our
notice on the basis of which it could be held that
in the properties of the State held by a sovereign
an interest was created or came into being in
favour of the family to which the sovereign
belonged.

(Emphasis supplied)

65. SectionIn H.H. Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia

Bahadur of Gwalior v. Union of India and Others 7 (also

known as privy purse case) it has been observed by Hon'ble

G.K. Mitter, J. that "it would appear that invariably the Rule

of Lineal Male Primogeniture coupled with the custom of

adopting a son prevailed in the case of Hindu Rulers who

composed of the bulk of this body."

66. In His Highness Maharaja Pratap Singh v Her Highness

Maharani Sarojini Devi and Others8 the Supreme Court,

after referring to several of earlier decisions of the Privy

Council, Supreme Court and different High Courts and to the

well accepted literatures held thus in paras 65 to 68 :

65. Though impartibility and primogeniture, in
relation to zamindari estates or other impartible
estates are to be established by custom, in the
case of a sovereign Ruler, they are presumed to
exist.

7     1971 (1) SCC 85
8 1994 Supp (1) SCC 734
88
FA No.119 of 2017

66. The allied question is whether the Rule of
Primogeniture applies only to the Rulership
(Gaddi) and not to the other property ? This is
precisely the argument of Mr. Hingorani. This
argument came to be accepted by the learned
Single Judge of the High Court of Himachal
Pradesh as well as the Division Bench of the Delhi
High Court in the judgment under appeal. We have
already referred to the observations of Lord
Tenterden in Advocate General v Amerchund. We
may also now refer to the observations of
Bhagawati, J. (as he then was) in SectionD.S. Meramwala
Bhayavala v. Ba Shri Amarba Jethsurbhai.

"If the Khari-Bagasra Estate was a sovereign
Estate, it is difficult to see how the ordinary
incidents of ancestral co-parcenary property
could be applied to that Estate. The
characteristic feature of ancestral co-
parcenary property is that members of the
family acquire an interest in the property by
birth or adoption and by virtue of such
interest they can claim for right : (1) the right
of partition ; (2) the right to restrain
alienations by the head of the family except
for necessity ; (3) the right of maintenance ;
and (4) the right of survivorship. It is obvious
from the nature of a sovereign Estate that
there can be no interest by birth or adoption
in such Estate and these rights which are
necessary consequence of community of
interest cannot exist. The Chief of a
sovereign Estate would hold the Estate by
virtue of his sovereign power and not by
virtue of municipal law. He would not be
subject to municipal law ; he would in fact be
the fountain head of municipal law. The
municipal law cannot determine or control
the scope and extent of his interest in the
Estate or impose any limitation on his powers
in relation to the Estate."

67. Again, at para 12 it is stated thus:

"As a sovereign Ruler he would be the full
and complete owner of the Estate entitled to
89
FA No.119 of 2017

do what he likes with the Estate. During his
lifetime no one else can claim an interest in
the Estate, Such an interest would be
inconsistent with his sovereignty. To grant
that the sons acquire an interest by birth or
adoption in the Estate which is a
consequence arising under the municipal law
would be to the municipal law would be to
make the Chief who is the Sovereign Ruler of
the Estate subject to the municipal law".

68. This being the position, the distinction drawn
between public and private property seems to be
not correct. Reference has been made to the case in
Revathinnal Balagopala Varma (supra) in this
regard. In so far as such a concept runs counter to
the basic attribute of sovereignty the said
distinction is not acceptable. In this connection, we
may refer to SectionMirza Raja Shri Pushavathi Viziaram
Gajapathi Raj Manne Sultan Bahadur v. Shri
Pushvathi Visweswar Gajapathi Raj. At page 416 it
was observed thus:

"It follows from the decision in Shiba Prasad
Singh's case, that unless the power is
excluded by statute or custom, the holder of
customary impartible estate, by a declaration
of his intention can incorporate with the
estate self-acquired immovable property and
thereupon, the property accrues to the estate
and is impressed with all its incidents,
including a custom of descent by
primogeniture. It may be otherwise in the
case of an estate granted by the Crown
subject to descent by primogeniture."

(Emphasis supplied)

67. In the above referred matter of His Highness Maharaja

Pratap Singh (supra) the Supreme Court also considered the

issue as to whether the primogeniture lapsed at the time of
90
FA No.119 of 2017

accession or merger in the years 1947-48 and has answered

the question thus in paragraphs 69 70 :

69. With this, we pass on to the next question
whether the primogeniture lapsed in the years
1947-48 ? It is the contention of the respondents
that Pratap Singh ceased to be governed by
primogeniture on 15-8-1947 and in any case, on
20-8-1948 when he ceased to be a sovereign. It is
true that there was no Rulership after India became
a Republic on 26th of January, 1950 but if the
estate is impartible in nature it would continue to
be governed by the Rule of primogeniture. We will
refer to SectionThakore Shri Vinaysinhji v. Kumar Shri
Natwarsinhji. At page 134 it is stated thus:

"The principle of law that is applicable to a
coparcenary property or to the coparceners is
inapplicable to an impartible estate or to the
holder thereof except that an impartible estate
is considered to be a joint family property to
the extent of the junior members succeeding
to the estate by right of survivorship. When
under certain circumstances the right of a
coparcener to take by survivorship can be
defeated, no exception can be taken, if the
right of survivorship of junior members of an
impartible estate to succeed to it is defeated
by the holder thereof by disposition by a
will."

(Emphasis supplied)

70. Again in SectionRajkumar Narsingh Pratap Singh
Deo v. State of Orissa at page 121 it is observed
thus;

"As we have just indicated, the customary
law which required the Ruler to provide
maintenance for his junior brother, can be
said to have been continued by Clause 4(b) of
the Order of 1948 and SectionArticle 372 of the
Constitution;...."

(Emphasis supplied)
91
FA No.119 of 2017

68. In His Highness Maharaja Pratap Singh (supra) the

Supreme Court has also considered the fact of Section 5 of the

Act, 1956 and the commentaries contained in Mulla's Hindu

Law to the applicability of rule of primogeniture under the

Act, 1956 and held thus in paragraphs 71 to 75 :

71. Section 5 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Section(Central Act 30 of 1956) states as follows:

"This Act shall not apply to-

(i) * * *

(ii) any estate which descends to a single heir
by the terms of any covenant or agreement
entered into by the Ruler of any Indian State
with the Government of India or by the terms
of any enactment passed before the
commencement of this Act ;

(iii) * * *"

72. In Mulla's Hindu Law, Sixteenth Edition at
page 766 it is stated:

"The exception is limited to the impartible
estates of Rulers of Indian States succession
to which is regulated by special covenants or
agreements and to estate, succession to which
is regulated by any previous legislation, and
the Estate and Palace Funds mentioned in
Sub-section (iii)."

73. At the stage of Bill, 1954 it was clearly
brought out in the Rajya Sabha Debates at pages
7115 and 7116 as under:

"Then there is another clause, Sub-clause (ii)
which says:

'any estate which descends to a single
heir by the terms of any covenant or
92
FA No.119 of 2017

agreement entered into by the Ruler of
any Indian State with the Government
of India or by the terms of any
enactment passed before the
commencement of this Act.'

This clause has been put in because, as we
know, it is only after the attainment of
independence that on a large scale there has
been integration of States, and there are
certain agreements and convenants which
have been entered into between the
Government and those Rulers of States, and
some arrangements have been made only
very recently with respect to their line of
succession. It is a special thing. What it says
is : 'any covenant or agreement entered into
by the Ruler'. Naturally, if we have entered
into any such agreement only as recently as
1947 or 1948 and much time has not elapsed,
it is not proper that by an enactment of a
general nature like this we should do
something which will set at nought the
agreements and the covenants which the
Government of India has solemnly entered
into with those people and on the strength of
which they had consented to allow their
States to be integrated with India. Of course,
I agree that probably it is not entirely a
socialist pattern or whatever you call it, but as
I have been always saying, I hold the opinion
that we have to proceed by the process of
evolution. I do not mince matters."

74. Therefore, it can be said with certainty that
this rule continued even after 1947-48.

75. Under SectionArticle 372 the law of succession
relating to primogeniture continues until it is
repealed. This is the position of law relating to
succession.

(Emphasis supplied)
93
FA No.119 of 2017

69. The Supreme Court in Bhaiya Ramanuj Pratap Deo v Lalu

Maheshanuj Pratap Deo Others9 the Supreme Court held

that Section 5 (ii) of the Act, 1956 protects an estate which

descends to a single heir by the terms of any covenant or

agreement entered into or by the terms of any enactment

inasmuch as SectionHindu Succession Act is not applicable to such

an estate. This section stands as an exception to Section 4 of

the Act, 1956.

70. The Delhi High Court in Maharaja Jagat Singh v Lt. Col.

Bhawani Singh Others10 held that private properties of

erstwhile rulers does not become HUF properties by virtue of

merger and accession. Section 4 of the Act, 1956 and 26 th

amendment of Constitution have no applicability to such

properties and that merger of impartible estate attached to the

Gaddi being the private property of the Ruler at the time of

merger do not become HUF properties. The Delhi High Court

held thus at paragraph 10 :

10. Mr. Parsaran then placed reliance on the 26th
Amendment of the Constitution of India. Reliance
on 26th Amendment of the Constitution of India, to
my mind, is misplaced. The 26th Amendment of
the Constitution is not retrospective and could not
have changed the succession of the property of
Maharaja Sawai Man Singh by defendant No. 1
which already took place in 1970. Maharaja Man
9 AIR 1981 SC 1937
10 AIR 1994 Delhi 14
94
FA No.119 of 2017

Singh died in the year 1970 whereas the 26th
Amendment came on the Statute Book in the year
1971, Hence the contention of Mr. Parsaran, cannot
be supported from the facts of this case that 26th
Amendment of the Constitution of India invalidated
the question of ownership appended to the status as
Ruler or that the Status of the Ruler having ceased
after coming into force the 26th Amendment of the
Constitution of India. Further contention of Mr.
Parsaran, Senior Advocate for the plaintiff that the
reason for impartibility is not the custom but the
Covenant alleged to be providing for impartibility
by accepting the custom. The custom is overridden
by Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

The impartibility attributable by virtue of the
covenant stands obliterated by the omission of
Articles 291 and 362 and the abolition of Ruler
ship and privy purse. This argument, to my mind, is
without substance in view of the Supreme Court
observation and also on the ground that being the
absolute monarch or sovereign so long the ruler
ship remains, the Ruler was to remain the owner of
all his private properties. There was no rulership
after India became republic on 26th January, 1950,
but the estate which was impartible in its nature
was to continue to be governed by the Rule of
Primogeniture which continued even after 1947-48,
since under SectionArticle 372 of the Constitution of India,
the law of succession relating to primogeniture
continue until it was repealed. This was repealed on
coming into force of the SectionHindu Succession Act,
1956. SectionBut the Hindu Succession Act itself under
Section 5 made a special provision exempting the
application of the Act from "any estate which
descends to a single heir by terms of any covenant
or agreement entered into by the Ruler of any
Indian State with the Government of India". The
debates in Parliament on the Hindu Succession Bill
also show that the intention of the Government was
to exempt the application of SectionHindu Succession Act
from the estates of the ancestral rulers of princely
States where the property was inherited by the
custom of male lineal primogeniture which custom
was preserved by the covenants signed with these
Rulers. Moreover, all these aspects have been
95
FA No.119 of 2017

gone into by the Supreme Court in the above
quoted cases wherein it has been held that other
family members cannot claim any right in the
private properties of a sovereign ruler even after
the merger. Therefore, it cannot be said that the
private properties' of the erstwhile ruler of Jaipur
State became HUF properties by virtue of merger
and accession. Therefore, reliance by Mr. Parsaran
either on the 26th Amendment or to Section 4 of
the Hindu Succession Act has no relevance with the
facts of this case.

(Emphasis supplied)

71. It is also to be noticed that in the matter of His Highness

Maharaja Pratap Singh (supra) the Supreme Court had an

occasion to interpret SectionArticle 12 of the convent entered

between the State of Nabha (Punjab) and the Governor

General of India. This Article is in pari materia with SectionArticle 3

of the agreement between the Maharaja of Bastar State and

the Governor General of India.

72. SectionArticle 12 discussed in the Nabha State matter and SectionArticle 3

of the agreement in the case of Bastar State are reproduced

hereunder for comparison and to demonstrate that they are

pari materia :

Article XII of the convent SectionArticle 3 of the
entered between the State of agreement between
Nabha (Punjab) and the Maharaja of Bastar
Governor General of India and the Governor
General of India
96
FA No.119 of 2017

Article XII. (1) The Ruler of The Maharaja shall be
each Covenanting State shall entitled to the full
be entitled to the full ownership, use and
ownership, use and enjoyment enjoyment of all
of all private properties (as private properties (as
distinct from State Properties) distinct from State
belonging to him on the date of properties) belonging
his making over the to him on the date of
administration of that State to this agreement.
the Raj Pramukh.

                                           The Maharaja will
(2) He shall furnish to the Raj furnish to the
Pramukh before the 20th day Dominion
of September, 1948, an Government before
st
inventory of all the immovable the 1 day of January
properties, securities and cash 1948 an inventory of
balances held by him as such all the immovable
private property. property, securities
and cash balance held
(3) If any dispute arises as to by him as such private
whether any item of property is property.
the private property of the If any dispute arises as
Ruler or State property, it shall to whether any item of
be referred to such person as property is the private
the Government of India may property of the
nominate in consultation with Maharaja or State
Raj Pramukh and the decision property, it shall be
of that person shall be final and referred to such officer
binding on all parties with judicial
concerned: experience as the
Dominion
Provided that no such dispute
shall be so referable after the Government may
30th June, 1949. nominate and the
decision of that officer
shall be final and
binding on both
parties.

73. Considering the language of the above stated Article the

Supreme Court in His Highness Maharaja Pratap Singh

(supra) held thus in para 78 :

97

FA No.119 of 2017

78. A careful reading of Article XII shows that
there is a clear distinction between the private
properties and the State properties. Such private
properties must be belonging to the Ruler and must
be in his use and enjoyment even earlier. Therefore,
properties which were recognised even earlier as
such private properties alone were to be left out and
submitted of the recognition as such. As stated in
White Paper (para 157, page 23 supra), the
demarcation and the settlement of the list was
carried out for the purposes of Integration. If this
be the correct position of law, the contrary
observations of the learned Single Judge are not
correct.

74. In Revathinnal Balagopala Varma (supra) the Supreme Court

had also considered an argument that private properties of a

Ruler were, in fact, joint family properties, therefore, the

provisions of the Act, 1956 would apply and the properties

would be available to be succeeded in accordance with the

said Act to the Legal Heirs. The Supreme Court answered the

question in paras 87 88 thus :

87. We may, at this place, point out that reliance
was placed by learned Counsel for the appellant on
certain decisions laying down that if joint Hindu
family property was by custom or otherwise
impartible, its nature of partible joint Hindu family
property will get revived on the commencement of
the SectionHindu Succession Act, 1956 and the Kerala
Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975.
Reference was also made to several passages from
Chapter 12 of Hindu Law by S.V. Gupte dealing
with impartible property including the
circumstances in which impartible property
becomes capable of partition. However, in view of
our finding that the properties in suit were not joint
family properties as alleged by the appellant but
were the personal properties of respondent No. 1,
98
FA No.119 of 2017

we do not consider it necessary to deal with them.
Neither any principle of law nor any authority has
been brought to our notice in view whereof
personal properties of respondent No. 1 could get
transformed into joint Hindu family properties
wherein the appellant could acquire an interest.
Even if we proceed on the basis that the personal
properties held by respondent No. 1 continued to
retain the character of impartibility and they
became partible subsequently, it would, in no way,
advance the case of the appellant inasmuch as it has
not been shown to us that the appellant would be an
heir of respondent No. 1 with regard to his personal
properties. Apparently such properties would on his
demise be governed either by testamentary
disposition or would devolve on his personal heirs.

88. Another point urged by learned Counsel for
the appellant was that the covenant could not
confer any right in favour of respondent No. 1
which he did not otherwise possess nor could it
take away the rights of the members of the joint
Hindu family by accepting the properties in suit to
be the personal properties of respondent No. 1.
Suffice it to say so far as this submission is
concerned that as has been held above, the
properties in suit had been earmarked by
respondent No. 1 as his personal properties which
he was competent to do as a sovereign and the
Government by accepting or approving the list of
properties submitted by him as his personal
properties in pursuance of the covenant did not
purport on its own to create any right in favour of
respondent No. 1 in such properties. The
Government could have disputed the list submitted
by respondent No. 1 but it chose not to do so and
the assertion of respondent No. 1 that the properties
in suit were his personal properties was
accepted.

75. The rule of succession in respect of Gaddi as well as the

properties pertaining thereto fell for consideration before the

Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court in Miss Talat
99
FA No.119 of 2017

Fatima Hasan (supra), wherein it has been held thus in

paragraphs 93 94 :

93. To sum up therefore, as a result of all the
above stated facts, circumstance and the legal
position, this Court has arrived at a conclusion that
the rule of succession in respect of the Gaddi of
Rampur State as well as the properties pertaining
thereto, has all along been the rule of male lineal
primogeniture, according to which the eldest male
heir of the late ruler inherited both the Gaddi and
the properties, and the properties had an impartible
character. On the merger of the State with the
dominion of India by means of the instrument of
merger dated 15-5-1949 Exhibit 4. the said position
remained uneffected and the late Nawab (Raza Ali
Khan) who declared the properties in suit as his
private property in terms of Clause 4 of the said
instrument, continued to hold these properties, as
part of the Gaddi of Rampur State, despite the
territories of the said State having been ceded to the
Government of India, This thus was the position on
March 6, 1966 when the succession to the Gaddi
and the properties in question opened on the death,
intestate, of the late Nawab Raza Ali Khan. Both
the Gaddi of Rampur State as well as the properties
owned by the said ruler, thus continued to be
governed by the rule of primogeniture and the
principle of impartiality, which did not come to an
end with the lapse of paramountcy and the
integration of the State with the dominion of India.
The late defendant No. 1 Nawab Murtuza Ali Khan,
thus, in accordance with the above said rule of
inheritance, succeeded to the Gaddi of Rampur as
well as the entire property then owned by the late
ruler. The said properly in the matter of succession
was not governed by the Muslim personal Law and
the plaintiff, or for that matter no other descendant
of the late Nawab, had any right to inherit the same
or any share therein. The position in this regard
also did not change on the abolition of privi purses
and cessation of recognition, as ruler for the
purposes of the Constitution the late Nawab, by the
President of India on account of the 26th
100
FA No.119 of 2017

Amendment to the Constitution in the year
1971.

94. The plaintiff thus has failed to establish that
she has inherited any share in the properties in suit,
moveable or immoveable, as claimed in the plaint,
on the demise of the late Nawab Raza Ali Khan.
The creation of the trust named Raza Trust by the
late Nawab, and for that matter the grant of Jagirs,
pensions and making other provisions for such
members of the family who are not to inherit any
share in the properties does provide a circumstance
lending support to the theory of succession by the
rule of male lineal primogeniture, though it does
not render the suit non-maintainable at the
threshold on that count alone.

(Emphasis supplied)

76. It is, thus, indisputably and fairly well settled that private

property of a Ruler was to remain with him under the

covenant/agreement executed with the GOI and the said

property has to pass on from one Ruler to another in terms of

SectionArticle 5 of the agreement. It would pass on to the next Ruler

under the principle of Lineal Male Primogeniture and the

private properties would not be treated as the joint family

property or HUF property of the Ruler. It is also settled that

by virtue of Section 5(ii) of the Act, 1956, the provisions of

the said Act would not apply to the suit property as under the

covenant, it would descend to a single heir under the terms of

the agreement executed between the Ruler of Bastar and the

GOI. It is also settled that the Gaddi and the property
101
FA No.119 of 2017

would pass on to the next Ruler and would thereafter pass on

to the legal heirs of the last Ruler.

77. The private property of the Ruler shall not be treated as HUF

property nor the Act, 1956 would apply to the said property

for yet another reason inasmuch as vide Ex.P/74, which is a

letter issued by the Government of the Central Provinces and

Berar dated 19.07.1948, it was specifically provided that the

Muafi Rights created by the Ruler i.e. Maharaja Parvir

Chandra Bhanjdeo for the maintenance of his brother in 27

villages are allowed. It is, thus, apparent that if the other

family members had any right over the private property by

birth or by survivorship there was absolutely no necessity to

create Muafi Rights for the maintenance of the Ruler's brother

in 27 villages. It is clearly discernible that the brothers of the

Ruler were treated as a separate entity at the time of merger

and they had no claim to the private property of the Ruler as

they were separated by granting them Muafi Rights in the

lands for their maintenance. The brothers of the Ruler have,

thus, no right over the properties of the Ruler which would

pass on to the next Ruler under law of Primogeniture.

Validity of the compromise decree :

102

FA No.119 of 2017

78. Another important contention raised by the learned counsel

for the appellant is in respect of the validity of the

compromise decree passed by the District Judge, Bastar, in

civil suit No.2-A/1978. The appellant/plaintiff contends that

the compromise decree was fraudulently obtained to deprive

the appellant of the property to which he is entitled by virtue

of successor to the Gaddi and the property under the rule of

Primogeniture. The decree is otherwise not binding because

the present plaintiffs/appellants were not arrayed as a party in

the civil suit No.2-A/1978.

79. In course of hearing of the instant appeal, we had summoned

the record of civil suit No.2-A/1978 wherein the compromise

decree was passed. The suit was filed by Vedvati Devi @

Subhraj Kumari (second wife), widow of Maharaja Praveer

Chandra Bhanjdeo versus Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo, S/o

Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo and Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo, S/o

Vijay Chandra Bhanjdeo. The prayer made in the suit was

only for declaration of WILL dated 27-2-1964 as null, void

and ineffective. The said WILL was allegedly executed by

Late Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo in favour of defendants

Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo and Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo.

No relief was claimed for declaration of title to the property

enlisted in Schedule 'A' to the plaint, however, compromise
103
FA No.119 of 2017

application was filed covering almost the entire private

property of erstwhile Ruler of Bastar and the parties to the

said suit partitioned the same amongst themselves. One of the

defendant in the present suit namely; Brijesh Bajpai,

Advocate, acted as guardian ad litem of Minor defendant

No.2 Devesh Chandra Bhanjdeo.

80. The compromise application filed in the said suit recites in

para 2 that the parties to the suit shall take half share each in

the properties belonging to Late Maharaja Praveer Chandra

Bhanjdeo. No declaration was issued in the suit in respect of

the WILL dated 27-2-1964, therefore, the said plaintiff

Vedvati Devi abandoned her plea regarding invalidity of the

said WILL.

81. A certified copy of the compromise decree was not placed in

the trial Court, however, as held in Jaswant Singh v Gurdev

Singh and Others11 once the compromise decree is passed in

terms of the compromise deed the same becomes a public

document and since copy of the same is now available before

this Court we shall proceed to examine the validity of the

same.

11 (2012) 1 SCC 425
104
FA No.119 of 2017

82. It is settled law that a decree passed by a civil Court binds

only the parties thereto and not any third party interest,

therefore, the said compromise decree neither binds nor

effects the rights of the present plaintiffs/appellants.

Otherwise also, the suit, which was initially filed for

invalidating the WILL dated 27-2-1964 was subsequently

compromised covering the entire private property of Late

Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo. Thus, the suit filed for one

purpose was enlarged to cover the entire private property of

Ruler of Bastar without impleading the original plaintiff who

was the last Ruler and male lineal primogeniture having

succeeded to the Gaddi and property of Bastar state under the

rule of primogeniture.

83. The decree was clearly obtained by fraud, therefore, in view

of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in A.V. Papayya

Sastry and Others v Govt. of A.P. and Others 12 the decree

would be non est being a nullity having no sanctity in the eyes

of law. Accordingly, the compromise decree dated 17-3-1978

is deserves to be and is hereby declared as void ab initio.

84. Defending the sale on the plea of bona fide purchasers, the

defendants have referred to the provisions contained in

Section 41 of the TP Act. The provision may save the
12 (2007) 4 SCC 221
105
FA No.119 of 2017

alienation by a person who was having title pursuant to a

decree which was later on set aside, however, in a case where

title was acquired on the basis of a decree obtained by fraud

the alienation would not be saved because fraud vitiates all

subsequent action. The decree obtained by fraud is void ab

initio, therefore, the sellers had no title to pass on to the

purchasers.

85. Both the parties have relied on WILLS executed by Late

Maharaja Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo or his first or second

wife, however, none of the WILLS have been filed in original

before the Court nor any of the attesting witnesses have been

examined to prove genuineness of the WILL in terms of the

requirement of law for proving a WILL as contained in

Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Sections

67 Section68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Thus, claim of

either parties on the basis of WILL is not proved and the

decision on their respective rights would be governed in the

manner discussed supra in this judgment on other issues.

86. Even otherwise, the Government of Madhya Pradesh had

issued an order as back as on 20-6-1953, under the approval

of the GOI, declaring Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo to

be mentally incapable of maintaining his estate and the entire
106
FA No.119 of 2017

private properties were placed under the charge of Court of

Wards (MP), therefore, the WILLs sought to be enforced by

either of the parties to the present suit is of no value as there is

ample evidence in form of Government orders declaring that

Maharaja Pravir Chandra Bhanjdeo was suffering from mental

infirmity.

87. The trial Court has decided the issue No.14 against the

plaintiffs holding that the suit suffers from res judicata. On

this account it would be suffice to mention that there is no

judgment of any Court on any issue in any previously

instituted suit deciding the same issue on merits which has

fallen for consideration in the present suit. Therefore, any

previous decision dismissing the suit of any of the party for

failure of the plaintiff to prosecute the suit or by way of

compromise would not hit the present suit under the

principles of res judicata. The finding on issue No.14 is, thus,

contrary to settled legal principle.

88. Trial Court has found, while deciding issue No.20, that the

land of Mundi Dongri was the personal property of Late

Maharaja Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo and not his private

property, however, the plaintiffs as well as the original

defendant No.4 Smt. Subhraj Kumari alias Vedvati who was
107
FA No.119 of 2017

the lone member of the Royal family to file written statement

amongst several defendants of the family, has admitted in her

written statement that the suit lands were entered in the list of

private properties prepared at the time of vesting of properties

of Bastar state in the dominion of India. Thus, in between the

plaintiffs and the defendants it is an admitted fact that all the

suit properties including the land of Mundi Dongri are the

private properties of Late Maharaja Praveer Chandra

Bhanjdeo, therefore, for this reason alone the finding to the

contrary recorded by the trial Court while deciding issue

No.20 is perverse. These findings are set aside to hold that

Mundi Dongri was also the private property in the hands of

Late Maharaja Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo. Even otherwise, a

contrary finding has been recorded while deciding issue

No.23A 23B that the suit lands were not personal property

of Late Maharaja Praveer Chandra Bhanjdeo.

89. The trial Court has also non-suited the plaintiff on the ground

that the suit only for declaration is not maintainable, however,

the prayer clause in the suit would clearly mention that the

suit is also for recovery of possession and for setting aside the

sale deeds, therefore, the suit is not merely for declaration, but

for other consequential reliefs, thus, it is maintainable.
108

FA No.119 of 2017

90. Trial Court also holds that there is non-joinder of causes of

action or that plaintiffs having not filed the return under the

Agricultural Ceiling Act, the suit is not maintainable, but

there is no discussion as to under which provision of law the

suit is not maintainable for non-filing of return under the

Agricultural Ceiling Act. Similarly, there is no discussion in

the judgment as to which particular cause of action suffers

from non joinder. The trial Judge appears to have made a

generalised statement while deciding these issues, however,

on a reading of the entire pleadings and evidence it does not

appear that the suit either suffers from non joinder of cause of

action or is barred under any other law, therefore, we hold that

the suit was maintainable in its present form.

91. On the basis of above discussion, we allow the appeal; set

aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court; and

pass the following decree in favour of the plaintiffs :

 The plaintiffs are declared owner and title holder

of the lands and properties shown in Schedule

'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E' 'G'. They are entitled to

recover possession of the lands and properties

from the respective defendants.

109

FA No.119 of 2017

 The sale deeds shown in Schedule 'B', 'E' 'G' to

the plaint are set aside. Plaintiffs are entitled to

recover vacant possession of the lands covered in

these schedules.

 The compromise judgment and decree passed by

the District Judge, Bastar, on 17-2-1978 in civil

suit No.2-A of 1978 is declared null and void

ab initio and is set aside.

92. Decree be drawn accordingly.

                Sd/-                                      Sd/-

(Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
Judge Judge
Gowri

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation