CHAMRU KUMAR Vs. DEVENDRA KUMAR AZAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 24.2.90 passed by Sri Abhay Shankar Prasad, 5th Additional District Judge, Munger, in Title Appeal No. 1 of 1980 whereby he has been pleased to set aside the judgment and decree dated 10,12.79 passed by Sri Rameshwar Narain Singh, Sub -Ordinate Judge, Khagaria, in Title Suit No. 32 of 1978 and decreed the suit of the plaintiff. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree the defendant -appellant has preferred this Second Appeal.

(2.) FIRST of all, I would like to state the case of the respective parties. The case of the plaintiffs -respondents is that Late Shanti Sah after purchase of the suit land in auction sale sold the land to Gudar Sah through registered sale deed dated 22.12.1932 for consideration of Rs. Four hundred with stipulation that the vendee shall pay all the balance of the mortgaged money equivalent to rupees four hundred due on simple mortgage dated 14.2.29 (Exhibit -13) executed by Shanti Sah in favour of Baldeo Sah. After purchase of the suit land, Gudar Sah dedicated the property to Radha Krishna idol of Mauza Bachhauta vide registered deed of Arpannama (Exhibit -9) dated 29.4.35 and appointed himself and two other persons, namely, Baldeo Sahand Tilo Sah as Shebaits. The said Baldeo Sah and Tilo Sah, who were issueless predeceased Gudar Sah and after that Gudar Sah also died leaving behind him his son Sattan Sah, who became shebaits after the death of Gudar Sah. On 13.3.73, Sattan Sah executed deed of exchange with one Jagdambi Kunwar (original plaintiff) and by virtue of the said deed of exchange he exchanged the suit land from the land of Jagdambi Kunwar. After exchange, original plaintiff Jagdambi Kunwar came in possession of the suit land, constructed thatched house thereon put Nad -Gori etc. and raised crops over the suit land. After some time the plaintiff came to know that defendant first party had managed to get a deed of exchange dated 2.9.1972 executed with respect to the suit land in his favour by bringing the defendant second party Khagan Sah son of Shanti Sah in his collusion and got his name mutated and on that basis the defendant first party started disturbing the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land which gave rise to filing of the suit.

(3.) THE case of the defendant second party is more or less the same and in his written statement the defendant second party has fully supported the case of defendant first party.