- (1.) THE plaintiff-appellant filed Title Suit No. 1 of 1976 in the court of the learned Massif at Dan tan, District Midnapore against the defendant-respond eats inter alia for declaration. of title in the suit property and for permanent injunction. The plaintiff's case as made out in the plaintiff inter alia was, that Dag No. 601 appertaining to the original C. S. Khatian No. 581 belonged to one Kamal Maisal who had three sons namely, Sibu, Durga Prasad alias Durgi and Hiru and on the death of the said Kamal Maisal, his said three sons inherited the entire estate of their deceased father including the suit land in equal shares. The said three brothers later on, had partitioned their said inherited properties amicably and started enjoying and possessing their respective lands separately and their respective individual status were also recorded in the record of rights which was made Exhibit No. 4 in the suit. Out of the original Plot No. 601 two data plots were created being plots Nos. 601/1180 and 601/1181. Plot No. 601 having an area of. 24 decimals was recorded in the name of Hiru; Plot No. 601/1180 with an area of. 27 decimals and lying on the adjacent east of Plot No. 601, was recorded in the name of Sibu and Plot No. 601/1181 with an area of. 25 decimals and lying just to the west of Plot No. 601, was recorded in the name of Durgi.
(2.) HIRU sold his entire. 24 decimals of land in Plot No. 601 to Durgi by executing a deed of sale dated May 11, 1920 which was registered on June 21, 1920. Of the said brothers, Hiru died first, next died Sibu leaving his widow Niroda as his sole heir. On the death of Niroda, Durgi being the nearest reversioner, inherited Plot No. 601/1180 in the share of Sibu and Durgi thus became the absolute owner of all those aforesaid three plots. Durgi had no son but one daughter named Rashamoyee. Plaintiff is the eldest son of Rashamoyee. Durgi executed a registered deed of gift on November 25, 1949 in respect of his several plots including Plot Nos. 601 and 601/1180 in favour of his wife Chandramoni and Chandramoni began to possess the same absolutely by amalgamating those two plots. Durgi died before the preparation of the R. S. Record-affrights and on his death his widow Chandranoni inherited his properties including Plot No. 601. 1181, as a life estate which, however, with the passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, ripened into absolute ownership and she thus became the full owner of all the three aforesaid Plots in C. S. Khatian No. 581 and she made a gift. of the entire jote covering the aforesaid Plot Nos. 601, 601/1 180 and 601/1181 under the said Khatian in favour of the plaintiff one of her grandsons, by a registered deed of gift dated 27. 10. 61 being Exhibit-1 along with other, plots and the plaintiff started possessing the same by amalgamating the above three plots. Plot No. 602 lying adjacent to east of plot No. 601/1180 belonged to the plaintiff and his brother. By an amicable partition between the plaintiff and his brother, the plaintiff got the western half of Plot No. 602 which he also merged with the suit plot.
(3.) THE cause of action for the suit, according to the plaintiff, arose in Chaitra 1380 B. S. , when the defendant No. 2 Bholanath Das, describing himself as the Secretary of then Ram Krishna Paramahanse Sevak Sangha, disclosed for the first time to the plaintiff that Dag No. 601 had been recorded in his name as the Secretary of the said Sangha who was the Defendant No. 1 in the suit and asked the plaintiff to vacate the suit plot on the allegation that Niroda, the widow of Sibu had executed a deed of gift covering Plot No. 601 in favour of defendant No. 1 Sangha, but according to the plaintiff Dag No. 601 did never belong to Sibu and in fact it was recorded in the name of Hiru in the C. S. Khatian who sold it to Durgi by a registered deed dated 1 1. 5. 1920 as stated above and that the R. S. Record -of- Rights in respect of the suit plot was also erroneous.;