- (1.) Counsel for the respondents is absent.
(2.) By the orders of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the matters in which proceedings in the lower courts were stayed by the orders of this Court, have been notified in the cause list for 22/23.04.2016. The instant Second Appeal was filed on 28.03.1995 and thereafter, it was listed on as many as 11 occasions. When it was pointed out to the Bench that the counsel representing the respondents is no more, the Registry was directed to send notices to the respondents. The office report indicates that notice has been served upon the respondent nos. 1 and 2. The instant appeal was admitted on 16.08.1995 and an order staying further proceedings in Execution Case No. 5 of 1995 was granted vide order dated 22.07.1996. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to adjourn the matter any further.
(3.) Briefly stated, Title Suit No. 33 of 1985 was instituted by Lodhu Oraon and Belsu Oraon for declaration of their right, title and interest in the suit schedule properties and for a declaration that deed of adoption dated 25.07.1966 executed in favour of Mangal Das Oraon, defendant no. 1 is not legal and valid and the defendant no. 1 has not acquired any valid right, title and interest over the suit land by virtue of the said adoptiondeed. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were formulated: 1. Is the suit of the plaintiffs maintainable 2. Have the plaintiffs valid cause of action for their suit 3. Is the suit barred by limitation, estoppel and also barred under Specific Relief Act 4. Whether plaintiffs' father Basu Oraon was adopted as son by Maru Oraon recorded tenant on 10.02.1942 5. Is Mangal Das Oraon defendant no. 5 adopted son of Maru Oraon 6. Are the plaintiffs entitled for declaration of title and recovery of possession 7. To what relief or reliefs are the plaintiffs entitled to ;