or actual, over the suit property. iii) That the civil suit for title and possession filed by Smt. Nandkanwarbai having been dismissed, the judgment of the civil Court operated as res judicata and hence the relief could not have been granted to her adopted son[Kailash Chand(plaintiff)] in the subsequent partition suit filed in the Revenue Court. iv) While placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Ram Vishal(dead) by LRs. And Others v. Jagannath and Another1, it was contended that since Smt. Nandkanwarbai was never in possession of the suit property which were agricultural lands’ either by inheritance or in lieu of maintenance, as a consequence, Section 14(1) of the Succession Act could not be applied so as to confer proprietary rights upon her adopted son[Kailash Chand(plaintiff)]. v) Learned counsel, Shri Jain further contended that reliance placed by the learned Single Judge on the decision of Vasant and Anr. v. Dattu & Ors.2, is ex-facie erroneous as the said 1 (2004) 9 SCC