STATE OF ORISSA Vs. FAKIR CHARAN SETHI
LAWS(SC)-2014-10-9
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ORISSA)
Decided on October 09,2014

STATE OF ORISSA Appellant
VERSUS
Fakir Charan Sethi Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF ORISSA VS. HARAPRIYA BISOI [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SHRI. BAJRANG SALES VS. NAGPUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST [LAWS(BOM)-2021-12-308] [REFERRED TO]
OTHERS VS. DWARKADAS KALLIANDAS [LAWS(CAL)-2019-11-150] [REFERRED TO]
ABUBAKAR VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2020-3-33] [REFERRED TO]
BACHANA KUMARI DEI VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2022-3-131] [REFERRED TO]
TAPAN RANJAN MAITI VS. SHYAMAL SARKAR [LAWS(CAL)-2024-4-223] [REFERRED TO]
THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, TAMIL NADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LTD. VS. P. KOTHANDAM AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-10-42] [REFERRED TO]
P.RAJAMANI VS. J.PUSHPA [LAWS(MAD)-2016-10-23] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Civil Appeal No. 1812 of 2010 arising from the common judgment and order dated 30.7.2009 passed by the High Court of Orissa in F.A.No.10 of 2001 affirming the decree dated 29.7.2000 passed by the learned Trial Court may be conveniently treated as the main appeal for consideration. In that event the fate of the connected appeals would stand determined by the outcome of the aforesaid Civil Appeal i.e. C.A. No.1812 of 2010.
(2.)The respondents 1 and 2, as plaintiffs, instituted Title Suit No.620 of 1998 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division) Bhubaneswar seeking a declaration of occupancy rights in their favour as well as for affirmation of their possession as tenants in respect of the suit land. A further direction to the defendants 1 and 2 (appellants) to accept rent from the plaintiffs and a permanent restraint against interference in the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land was also sought in the suit filed.
(3.)The short case of the plaintiffs(respondents) before the learned Trial Court was to the effect that their father Nidhi Sethi who served under the Ex-ruler of Kanika Raja as a washer man was granted lease of the suit land measuring 4.16 acres covered under Sabik Plot No.292 appertaining to holding No.303 situated in Mouza Chandrasekharpur. According to the plaintiffs, the aforesaid land was leased to their father on 14.2.1942; possession of the land was delivered and rent paid by their father as tenant was accepted by the Ex-ruler. The plaintiffs further claimed that an unregistered Hatapatta (lease agreement) (Ext.1) was also granted by the Ex- proprietor in favour of the plaintiffs' father. It was the case of the plaintiffs that since the date of the lease their father and thereafter the plaintiffs had been in possession of the suit land using the same for residential as well as agricultural purposes.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.