VISHNUDEO NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal at the instance of the defendant -appellants has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree dated 30.3.1989 and 22.4.1989 respectively passed in Title Appeal No. 17 of 1986 by Shri Shamsher Bahadur Singh, Additional District Judge, Gumla whereby and whereunder this appeal was allowed and the judgment dated 10.3.1986 passed by Shri U.N. Sinha, Munsif, Gumla in Title Suit No. 28 of 1981 was set aside.
(2.) THE plaintiff -respondents had filed the said title for declaration of his title and confirmation of possession and in the alternative for recovery of the possession in respect of the suit land fully described in the schedule appended at the foot of the plaint and also sought further relief for a declaration that the order dated 24.8.1973 passed in S.A.R. Case No. 152 of 1972, order dated 7.11.1977 passed by Additional Collector, Ranchi in Revenue Appeal No. 63R/15 of 1974 and 1975 and order dated 3.3.1981 by the Commissioner, Ranchi in Revenue Revision Case No. 279 of 1977 are illegal and not binding on the plaintiff respondents. The case of plaintiff -respondents, in brief, is that the suit land detailed at the foot of the plaint stands recorded in the name of Somra Kharia, Dasai Kharia, Johan Kharia and Boka Kharia in the record of rights and in the year 1920 -21 Somra Kharia and Dasai Kharia aforesaid sold the said suit land to Dwarika Singh and executed as unregistered deed of conditional sale and said Dwarika Singh came in possession of the suit land. It is alleged that Johan Kharia and Boka Kharia were out of the village at that time and on return to the village they had also confirmed the said conditional sale deed. The plaintiff -respondent is an adopted son of Dwarika Singh aforesaid and after death of said Dwarika Singh he has inherited the said suit property and continued in peaceful possession of the suit land. It is also alleged that Dwarika Singh along with this plaintiff - respondent had planted mango orchard in the eastern portion of the suit land and the remaining portion of the suit land in their cultivating possession the defendant -appellants, namely. Etc. Kharia, Johan Kharia, Rafel Kharia and Soren filed a Title Suit No. 167 of 1969 on 22.8.1969 in the Court of Munsif Gumla against the plaintiff -respondent for declaration of their right and title in respect of the suit land and recovery of possession over the same in which the plaintiff -respondent had appeared and filed written statement on 26.11.1969 but the said suit was dismissed in default and a miscellaneous case for its restoration was also dismissed in default on 25.4.1972 and there was a proceedings under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure between the parties in respect of the suit land which was converted into a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and possession of the plaintiff was declared over the suit land in the said proceeding. Thereafter defendant - appellant Rafail Kharia had filed a petition under Section 71 -A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for restoration of the suit land giving rise to S.A.R. Case No. 152 of 1972 -73 which was allowed and order for restoration of possession was made of the suit land and the plaintiff -respondent preferred an appeal before the Additional Collector Ranchi against the impugned order aforesaid giving rise to Revenue Appeal 63/1974 -75 which was dismissed and against the said order he filed Revenue Revision No. 279 of 1972 before the Commissioner, Ranchi which was also dismissed and on the strength of the aforesaid orders the defendant -appellants are went upon to cultivate the suit land and clog having been (sic) on the title of the plaintiff -respondent in respect of the suit land, he has filed this suit for the reliefs as stated above.
(3.) THE case of the defendant -appellant, inter alia, is that the suit of the plaintiff -respondent is not maintainable and barred by law of limitation and resjudicata and the suit land was never transferred to Dwarika Singh by executing a document of conditional sale by their ancestors and they were wrongly and illegally dispossessed by the plaintiff -respondent from the suit land in the year 1978 and their possession was restored over the suit land as per the order passed in the said S.A.R. case. It is also alleged that Title Suit No. 167 of 1969 was filed at the instance of the plaintiff -respondent in the name of Eto Kharia and the order in the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is illegal in view of the order passed by the Revenue Courts regarding the restoration of possession of the suit land in favour or the defendant -appellants.;