MANGRA DHOBT Vs. KHEDUA BARAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is against the judgment and decree of reversal, filed by the Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellant.

(2.) The Plaintiffs filed Title Suit No. 15/86 in the Court of Munsif, Gumla praying relief, inter alia, for cancellation of the sale deed No. 2032/79 dated 10-11-79 and declaration of their right, title and interest with respect to the property which was the subject matter of the said sale deed and which was fully described in Schedule B of the plaint. The Plaintiff had also sought for confirmation of possession and alternatively for recovery of possession of the said Schedule B property.

(3.) The Plaintiffs case was that the land of Plot Nos. 702, 929, 1336, 1338 and 1430 appertaining to Khata No. 48 of village Bhargaon P.S. Sessai within the District of Gumla were recorded in the name of Dashrath Dhobi son of Bahuran Dhobi. Dashrath Dhobi died leaving behind two sons Chandar Dhobi and Shalik Dhobi died leaving behind two sons Chandar Dhobi and Shalik Dhobi. Said Chandar Dhobi was married to a lady of village Murmu but she died issueless. He then married another lady of village Amalia within the District of Gumla but she also died issueless then he kept the defendant No. 1 Nirsa Dhibin for his household work. Defendant No. 1, Nirsa Dhibin, was already married and she had a son and a daughter from Sohar Dhobi of village Konbir and both were alive. After the death of Dashrath Dhobi Ancestral property described in Schedule B remained joint in the hands of his sons Chander Dhobi and Salik Dhobi. When Chander Dhobi died, the said property exclusively succeeded by the sons of Salik Dhobi. When Chander Dhobi died, the said property exclusively succeeded by the sons of Salik Dhobi who came in joint possession of the said property. It was stated that the defendant No. 1 Nirsa Dhibin without having any title or possession over the suit land illegally executed the registered sale deed No. 2032/79 dated 10-11-79 purportedly transferring the Schedule B property in favour of Khedua Braik Defendant No. 2. It was further stated that the said Nirsa Dhibin had no right, title and possession over the said land described in Schedule B of the plaint and she had no authority, to transfer the same to anybody and as sucb by the sale deed defendant No, 2 Khedua Braik did not derive any title or possession over the Schedule B lands. However, on the basis of the said forged and fabricated sale deed, the Defendant started laying false claim over the suit land. Hence the suit was filed.