GITARANI PAUL Vs. DIBYENDRA KUNDU ALIAS DIBYENDRA KUMAR KUNDU
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CALCUTTA)
(Smt.) Gitarani Paul
DIBYENDRA KUNDU ALIAS DIBYENDRA KUMAR KUNDU
Click here to view full judgement.
Kuldip Singh, J. -
(1.)Gitarani Paul instituted a suit for declaration of title and possession in respect of thirteen plots of land in Mouza Boinchee, Police. Station Pandua, State of West Bengal. It was averred in the plaint that the said land was under the possession of Bauries who were underraiyats. The original owner of the land was Dasarathi Dutta but the land has throughout been under the holding of the under-raiyats. After the coming into force of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 Dasarathi Datta ceased to have any right or interest in the land and the same stood vested in the State of West Bengal. Gitarani Paul purchased the land from the Bauries by way of sale deeds dated February 19, 20 and 26, 1960. According to her the possession of the 'land was also delivered to her by the Bauries. It was further stated in the plaint that on. June 5, 1960 one Dibyendra Kundu armed with gun and accompanied by some police men came to the land in dispute and destroyed the standing crop of the plaintiff. It was also alleged that Dibyendra Kundu ploughed the land and planted gama grass seedlings on the land. It was on these facts that the suit was filed. Dibyendra Kundu and Dasarathi Datta were arrayed as defendant 1 and defendant 2 in the suit. The Bauries were impleaded as proforma defendants.
(2.)Dasarathi Dutta controverted the stand of the plaintiff. According to him, the Bauries surrendered their rights and also the possession of the land to his father in the year 1938. He further stated that after the death of his father he sold the land to Dibyendra Kundu on May 7, 1959 and also delivered the possession of the land to him.
(3.)The trial Court on the appreciation of oral and documentary evidence came to the conclusion that the Bauries never surrendered their tenancy in favour of the father of Dasarathi Dutta defendant No. 2 and also that the sale of the suit land by the Bauries in favour of plaintiff was valid and the plaintiff had title to the suit lands. On these findings the trial Court decrees the suit. Defendants 1 and 2 went in appeal before the Subordinate Judge, Hooghly. The learned Judge affirmed the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.