L. Mohapatra, J. - (1.) THE Plaintiffs are the Appellants against a confirming judgment.
(2.) THE case of the Plaintiffs -Appellants is that one Ghichei Majhi was the maternal grand mother of the Plaintiffs who succeeded to the suit properties on death of her father Khutalu Majhi who was the original owner thereof. Ghichei Majhi and married to one Kumel Majhi and they had one daughter namely, Sobha Dei (mother of the Plaintiffs) and one son namely, Bhagaban. Bhagaban had married to one Bhama Majhi and during life time of Bhama Majhi, Bhagaban died issueless. Defendant No. 1 is a stranger to the family. After death of Ghichei Majhi, mother of the Plaintiffs and Bhagaban Majhi succeeded to the properties left by their mother Ghichei Majhi. After death of Bhagaban Majhi without any issue, the mother of the Plaintiffs succeeded to the entire properties as the only survivor, Bhama, having no claim over the properties. However, the Defendant No. 1 obtained a sale deed from Defendant No. 2 i.e. Bhama Majhi and started disturbing in the possession of the Plaintiffs over the suit land who had succeeded to the properties after death of their mother Sobha Dei. The Plaintiffs, therefore, filed the suit for declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit land. Defendant No. 1 filed a written statement denying the plaint allegations and it was specific case of the Defendant No. 1 that Khutalu Majhi was the original title holder of the suit properties. His further case is that the mother of the Plaintiffs having not succeeded to the suit properties and the same having been purchased by him from the Defendant No. 2 who is the original owner of the properties under a registered sale deed, it is not open to the Plaintiffs to challenge the validity of the same. His further case is that the entire properties were recorded in the name of Kumel Majhi (husband of Ghichei Majhi) who was in possession of the same title his death and after his death the entire suit land was inherited to his only son Bhagaban and after death of Bhagaban, his wife Bhama succeeded to the properties. All the revenue records indicate Kumel as the owner of the properties. A further dispute was also raised stating that Kumel is the son of Khutalu Majhi and Ghichei is the wife of Kumel. The Plaintiffs case that Ghichei was the daughter of Khutalu Majhi is specifically denied.
(3.) ON the above pleadings of the parties, trial Court framed as many as 9 issues, and found that evidence on record clearly indicate that Kumel is the son of Khutalu Majhi and after death of Kumel Majhi, his only son Bhagaban succeed to the properties. After death of Bhagaban, his wife Bhama who is the vendor of Defendant No. 1 succeeded to the properties and as such it declared the sale by Bhama in favour of Defendant No. 1 to be valid. The trial Court further held that Kumel having expired prior to 1956. Sobha, the mother of the Plaintiffs did not have any right over the suit properties and the entire properties went to the only son of Kumel. With the above findings, the suit was dismissed. The appeal carried by the Plaintiffs before the learned Addl. District Judge, Bolangir was also dismissed on similar findings.;