JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) This writ application has been filed challenging the order dated 12.3.01
passed in Transferred Application No. 263 of 2000. While assailing the judgment
of the Tribunal, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Tribunal has ignored the judgments and decrees passed by Civil Courts which
have become final. In support of such contention the learned counsel for the
petitioner first relied on a judgment dated 5.2.66 passed by the learned Munsif,
Additional Court, Contai, in Title Suit No. 57 of 1963. The said suit was decreed
in part on contest and the title of the plaintiff in the suit property described in
Schedule 'Ka' to the plaint excepting plot 1783 of Mouza Patna appertaining to
Khatian No. 404 was declared, and it was made clear that the said property
cannot vest. The decree was also passed to the above effect. Against the said
judgment and decree the State preferred an appeal. The said appeal was
numbered as Title Appeal No. 181 of 1966. The said appeal was also dismissed
by the learned District Judge, Midnapore. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that no second appeal was filed and in support of such contention,
the learned counsel has filed an information slip which is annexure P-3 to this
petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that another
suit was also filed for partition. The said suit was also decreed on contest in
preliminary form against defendant No. 13 in the said suit and ex parte against
other defendants. In the said suit it was declared that the record-of-rights in
respect of 'Ga' Schedule properties showing as vested land of the State of West
Bengal is wrong and the right of the plaintiff for 1/4th share in respect of 'Ka'
Schedule properties was also declared. The appeal filed against the said
judgment and decree was also dismissed by the learned District Judge,
Midnapore, on 6.8.75.
(3.) Thereafter the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court
being C.O.4031(W) of 1980. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. N. Roy (as His
Lordship then was) by a judgment and order dated 23.4.80 made the
following observation:
"The application was moved with notice to the learned Government Pleader
and Mr. Banerjee has appeared for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. It appears that
in a duly constituted suit the petitioner appropriately established his right,
title and claim including interest over the lands in question, the recording
whereof have been denied through the order in Annexure 'G'. When the
right, title and interest of the petitioner have been safely found by the decrees
as produced, so there is no reason why the lands as mentioned in Annexure
'G', should not be recorded in the name of the petitioner and the more so
when, an appeal, which was taken by the State of West Bengal from the
decree or passed in favour of the petitioner did not succeed.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.