Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This second appeal is at the instance of defendant No. 1 and is directed against the judgment and decree dated February 28, 1989 passed by the learned Assistant District, Judge, Baruipur in Title Appeal No. 31 of 1987 thereby affirming those dated June 29, 1989 passed by the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Baruipur in Title Suit No. 178 of 1985.
(2.) The respondents filed the aforesaid suit for declaration of their title and for permanent injunction and the case made out by the respondents was as follows:- 21 decimals of land in Mouza Chakberia appertaining to Khatian No. 124 is the subject matter of the suit property. The plaintiff No. 1 has 6 annas, 4 gondas, 1 kara, 2 krantis, 7 tils and the plaintiff No. 2 has 3 annas, 2 gondas, 2 krantis and 13 tils share in the suit property and their share have been correctly recorded in Revisional Record of Right. The remaining share belonged to proforma defendants. The defendants were trying to oust the plaintiffs from the suit property. Hence the aforesaid suit for declaration of their title and for injunction.
(3.) The aforesaid suit was contested by defendant Nos. 1 and 3 filing two separate written statements. According to defendant No. 1 the suit property originally belonged to one Daulat Khan having 16 annas share therein. Subsequently Daulat Khan died and his share was inherited by his daughter Chhabizan Bibi and son Kalu Khan. Chhabizan Bibi used to reside far away from the suit property and as such she made an oral gift of her share to Charizan Bibi, the wife of Kalu Khan. On the death of Kalu Khan, the suit property was inherited by his wife Charizan Bibi, his daughter Chhabera Bibi and the son Sukur Khan. Subsequently Charizan Bibi for self and as guardian of the then minor plaintiffs sold the suit property to Ziad Ali on January 19, 1963. Ziad Ali sold the same to one Satish Bazi by a Kobala dated March 19, 1966. There was talk for reconveyance at the time of aforesaid sale. But ultimately Satish Bazi and Chharijan Bibi sold the suit property to Shyamapada Sardar. Thereafter Shyamapada Sardar by a Kobala dated March 12,.1984 sold the suit property to the defendant No. 1. According to the defendant No. 1, the plaintiffs were although minor at the time of execution of the sale deed by their mother, they never claimed the suit land and did not challenge the Kobala executed by their mother as the guardian of the minors within 3 years after attaining majority. According to the defendant No. 1, previously the vendor of the defendant No. 1 was and thereafter he himself is possessing the land adversely and with the knowledge of the plaintiffs for more than 12 years and thus acquired title by adverse possession.;