2025:JHHC:28569 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 414 of 2017 1. Budhuwa Oraon, S/o Late Mangra Oraon 2. Charo Oraon, S/o late Mangra Oraon 3. Sukra Oraon, S/o Late Mangra Oraon All resident of village Dandai Hehal, P.S. Ratu District Ranchi … … Plaintiffs/Appellants/Appellants Versus 1. Madhupal Oraon, S/o Late Gurudeo Oraon 2. Jagatpal Oraon, S/o Late Gurudeo Oroan 3. Dharampal Oraon, S/o Late Gurudeo Oraon 4. Lakhia Orain, W/o late Gurudeo Oraon 5. Sukaro Orain, W/o Late Dende Oraon 6. Chumpa Oraon, S/o Late Dende Oraon 7. Sukra Oraon, S/o late Dende Oraon 8. Angnu Oraon, S/o late Dende Oraon 9. Bablu Oraon, S/o late Dende Oraon 10. Bhaglu Oraon, S/o late Etwa Oraon 11. Birsu Oraon, S/o late Etwa Oraon 12. Bunchi Oraon, S/o late Etwa Oraon All resident of village Dandai Hehal, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Ratu, District Ranchi 13. Deputy Commissioner, P.O. GPO, Ranchi P.S. Sadar, Ranchi … … Defendants/Respondents/Respondents --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Appellants : Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents : --- 16/17.09.2025 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. 2. This Appeal has been filed against the judgement dated 20.05.2017 and decree signed on 02.06.2017 passed by learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Title Appeal No.109 of 2008 whereby the appeal has been dismissed. The trial court judgment was passed by learned Sub-Judge II, Ranchi in Title Suit No.254 of 2006 dated 28.07.2008 (decree signed on 11.08.2008) whereby the suit was dismissed. 3. The suit was filed for declaration of right, title and interest and also for recovery of possession. 2 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the judgements are perverse and hence substantial question of law be framed. 5. This court finds that there are concurrent findings recorded by both the courts that the respondents were claiming right , title interest and possession over the suit property by virtue of registered sale deed dated 25.05.1939 and they were in continuous possession. Both the courts have held that the defendants have got valid, right, title, interest and possession over the suit land through sale deed dated 25.05.1939 which was never challenged. 6. This Court finds that there are concurrent findings recorded by both the courts. No ground for framing any substantial question of law has been made out by the learned counsel for the appellants, accordingly, this second appeal is hereby dismissed. 7. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is dismissed as not pressed. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 17.09.2025 Saurav/