- (1.) THE defendants are the appellants. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.5.1989 passed by 4th Additional District Judge, Palamau in Title Appeal No. 19 of 1986 whereby he has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 10.3.1986 passed by Munsif, Daltonganj in Title Suit No. 34 of 1981 and thereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs -respondents has been decreed.
(2.) THE plaintiffs filed the aforementioned suit for declaration of their occupancy right over the suit land mentioned in Schedule A of the plaint. Plaintiffs' case is that about 7.56 acres of land of Khata No. 116 of Village Bajalpur P.S. Manatu District Palamau was recorded in the names of Lusur Sao. Ram Sanahi Sao and Bihari Sao having 2/3rd share and Raghu Sao, the other set having one share. Raghu Sao died leaving behind his two sons. Tulsi Sao (defendant No. 1) and Budhan Sao (father of defendant Nos. 2 to 5). After the death of Raghu Sao his heirs inherited his 1/3rd share in the aforesaid Khata who came in possession of the same. Plaintiffs' further case is that Lusur Sao and Bihari Sao died issueless and there was none to make payment of rent of their 2/3rd share with the result that the landlords took possession of their share. It was alleged that at that time there were two landlords, namely, Siddique Khan and Sumitra Devi. The above landlords took possession of the land on the belief that those three tenants have abandoned their 2/3rd share. It is alleged that after the plaintiffs came in possession of the land, one of the landlords, namely, Siddique Khan settled his share to different person who came in possession of the same. Similarly another landlord, Sumitra Devi also settled her share to Fula Sahun, wife of Sukhu Sao. After taking settlement of the land they started paying rent to the landlords and also to the State of Bihar. They also sold 39 decimals of land out of different plots to Amita Bibi and after purchase Amita Bibi came in possession of 39 decimals of land and constructed a house. In this way the plaintiffs alleged to have come in possession of the suit land and it was only because of the objection petition filed by the Amit Ambar Kachhap Versus Union Of India defendants for cancellation of jamabandi opened in the name of Fula Sahun on which cancellation order was passed, the plaintiffs finding no option, instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration of their rayati interest on the ground that they are in possession of the suit land. The defendants -appellants contested the suit by filing written statement denying and disputing each and every statement made in the plaint. Defendants' case is that the plea of abandonment of land and resumption of the same by the landlords are all false and incorrect. It is alleged that the defendants all along remained in possession of the land and there was neither any abandonment by the raiyats nor resumption by the landlords. Defendants' further case is that illegal opening of jamabandi in the name of Fula Sahun was ultimately cancelled by the Additional Collector in a cancellation proceeding.
(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit accepting the contention made by the plaintiffs regarding abandonment of the land resumption of the same and also the plea of continuous possession over the land by the landlords and the plaintiffs, in their tern.;