RADHAMOHAN PATRA AND ORS. Vs. GYANENDRA KAR
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Radhamohan Patra And Ors.
Click here to view full judgement.
G.B. Patnaik, J. -
(1.) DEFENDANTS are the Appellants against a confirming judgment in a suit for permanent injunction.
(2.) PLAINTIFF filed the suit for restraining the Defendants from trespassing upon and interfering with the peaceful possession of the Plaintiff in respect of the suit .land on the allegation that the Defendants were the owners of the suit land in village Khajuripada, P. S. Serango, the land having been described fully in the Schedule of the plaint and the said land, according to the Plaintiff, was leased 'out to him under Ext. 2 dated 5 -5 -1962 and possession was delivered to him. The said Ext. 2 is an unregistered deed. Later on, on 13 -2 -1966 under another deed (Ext. 1), the Plaintiff purchased the 1 and. The said Ext. 1 is also' an unregistered deed. While the Plaintiff was in possession, on 2 -6 -1976, the Defendants threatened to trespass and hence the present suit. It is also the case of' the Plaintiff in the plaint that the Plaintiff was paying Rajbhag and cess to Defendant No. 1 all along. The Defendants in their written statement denied the allegations made in the plaint and pleaded that the land being service Inam land was inalienable and stood vested in the State of Orissa free from all encumbrances under the provisions of the Ganjam and Boudh (Village Offices Abolition) Act, 1969. Thereafter the land was settled with Defendant No. 1 after due inquiry and in this view of the matter, neither Ext. 1 nor 2 would confer any title on the Plaintiff. It is the further case of the Defendants that they are all along possessing the suit land on their own right title and interest.
(3.) ON these pleadings, the learned Munsif framed a number of issues and came to the conclusion that the Plaintiff had no title over the suit land and the title in respect of the land lay with Defendant No. 1. After coming to the aforesaid conclusion the learned Munsif further held that the Plaintiff came into possession of the land pursuant to the agreement of the year 1962 (Ext. 2). and therefore, could protect the said possession by application of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Accordingly he decreed the suit.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.