The dispute is with regard to part of land of Aaraji No.586. Plaintiff claims to have purchased the same vide sale deed dated 21.9.93 from one Smt. Uma Shukla, who is said to have been declared the owner in possession of 6 Bigha, 6 Biswa of the aforesaid land. The case of the defendant is that Smt. Uma Shukla was never the owner of any part of Aaraji No.586 and even if she was accepted to be owner of part of the same the land in dispute is not the same as has been transferred by sale deed dated 21.9.93 and in fact is a land of the defendant on which their ancestral house exist in which connection paper no.37-C was filed but the same was not considered by either of the court below. Thus, the judgments and orders of the court below stand vitiated for non-consideration of the material piece of evidence.
Sri N.K. Srivastava, who has accepted notice on behalf plaintiff-respondent no.1 prays for and is allowed a month's time to file counter affidavit. Two weeks thereafter to the defendant/appellant to file rejoinder affidavit.
Issue notice to the plaintiffs/respondents no. 3, 4, 5 and 7 by registered post returnable within 6 weeks.
Till the next date of listing parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the land in dispute.
Order Date :- 9.9.2010 piyush