- (1.) THIS appeal is against the judgment dated 10.1.2003 and decree dated 18.1.2003 of the affirmance passed by the District Judge, Simdega in Title Appeal No. 11 of 2002 upholding the judgment and decree, dated 20.7.2001 passed by the Munsif, Simdega in Title Suit No. 5 of 1999.
(2.) THE plaintiff is the appellant -appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of right, title and confirmation of possession over the suit lands. The plaintiffs case was that the suit lands appertaining to Khata No. 163 of village Nanesera P. S. Simdega were recorded in the name of Lohra Kharia son of Mangra Kharia in the last Revisional Survey record of right, which were the subject matter of the suit. It was stated that the said Mangra Kharia was also known as Basrai Kharai Mangra Kharia and Basrai Kharia are the names of one and the same person. The plaintiffs are the descendants of the recorded tenant Lohra Kharia. It was stated that the plaintiff No. 1 was in service and taking undue advantage of his absence, defendants managed to gain over the local Karamchari and got rent receipt issued in their favour in respect of the suit lands. When the Plaintiff No. 1 came to know about the same, he filed a petition before the Circle Officer, Simdega for cancellation of jamabandi shown in the names of the defendants. The CO. recommended the same to the L.R.D.C Simdega and ultimately it was placed before the Additional collector Gumla as Misc. Case No. 1/94 -95. The Additional Collector held that the defendants names were illegally entered in jamabandi although they were not even in possession of the land. He, however, observed that the cancellation of Jamabandi is beyond his jurisdiction and accordingly parties were directed to approach the Civil Court. It was stated that the defendants being the legal heirs and successors of the said settles are claiming the suit lands on the basis of a sada surrender deed showing surrender of his right by Silbanus Kharia son of Lohra Kharia in favour of the land lord who allegedly then settled the entire suit land by a sada hukumnama dated 28.1.1955. According to the plaintiffs, the same are false and fabricated. Lohra Kharia had no son named as Silbanus Kharia who could have surrendered the suit land and as such the defendants had got no right and title over the suit lands.
(3.) DEFENDANTS contested the suit mainly on the ground that genealogy and relationship shown in the plaint was not correct and that Mangra Kharia had only son named as Lohra Kharia who had a son named Silbanus Kharia. It was contended that the plaintiffs are descendant of the recorded tenant of Khata Nos. 154 and 155 which stands in the name of Lohra Kharia, Mangra Kharai and Konda Kharia sons of Basraia Khari and the plaintiffs are neither the legal heirs of the recorded tenant of Khata No. 163 which is the subject matter of the suit nor they are in cultivating possession of the suit lands. It was pleaded by the defendants that Silbanus Kharia who was the son of the recorded tenant surrendered the entire suit land to the Ex -Landlord who came in possession over the same and subsequently settled the said land with the defendant by virtue of a sada hukumnama dated 28.1.1955 and since the said settlement they have been in possession of the suit land on paying the rent to the Ex -Landlord and subsequently after vesting of the zamindari to the State Government.;