RAJESH KUMAR,J. - (1.) Heard the counsel for the appellant.
(2.) The present Second Appeal arises out of Title Suit No. 26 of 2002 wherein appellant/plaintiff has filed a suit for Decree of declaration of permanent raiyati rights, title and interest over the suit land and Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agent to encroach upon in any portion of the land mentioned in Schedule 'C' of the plaint. BRIEF FACTS:
(3.) The case of the plaintiff as stated in the plaint is that C.S. Khata No. 284 included several C.S. Plots of Mouza Kanari (Tola Tupkadih) under Jaridih Police Station, Pargana-Gola, District- Hazaribagh, at present District Bokaro, recorded in the names of Sukhu Manjhi. Sukhu Manjhi died leaving behind two sons Nuna Manjhi and Chura Manjhi, who subsequently separated and partitioned their land. Plot No. 3154 measuring 70 decimals along with other lands were allotted to Nuna Manjhi who remained in separate possession over it till his death. Nuna Manjhi died leaving behind his three sons Bihari Manjhi, Durga Manjhi and Bhim Manjhi. Bihari Manjhi died leaving behind two sons Baneshwar Manjhi (Plaintiff No. 1) and Jagannath Manjhi, who died leaving behind his two sons Lalu Manjahi (Plaintiff No. 2) and Pavai Manjhi (Plaintiff No. 3). Durga Manjhi another son of Nuna Manjhi died leaving his only son Sukhram Manjhi (plaintiff No. 4). Bhim Manjhi son of Nuna Manjhi was still alive and made proforma defendant (No. 6). After death of Nuna Manjhi, plot No. 3154 allotted to Bihari Manjhi, who thus came in possession over the 70 decimals land of Plot No. 3154. It is further case of the plaintiffs that Bihari Manjhi had a sister. Karmi Manjhian (defendant no.1) is the daughter of his sister, who married Mahabir Manjhi (Defendant no. 2) of village- Jhiglopa, P.S. Balidih, District- Bokaro. Landed property of Mahabir Manjhi acquired by the State. For extension of Bokaro Steel Plant, thereby defendant no. 2 become displaced, who approached Bihari Manjhi father of plaintiffs. Bihari Manjhi, who orally allowed them to occupy and construct house over 5 decimals of land in plot no. 3154 in the south eastern corner. In the month of May, 2001 defendants tried to encroach upon the land of plaintiffs over plot no. 3154 forcibly and dishonestly, a proceedings Under Section 144 Cr.P.C. Being M.P. Case No. 144/2001 initiated, but dropped later on considering the dwelling house of defendants. Suddenly on 17.3.2002, at about 8.00 A.M., the defendants tried to dig foundation of boundary wall adjoining west of their western house. Though, the defendants have stopped digging work but they are adamant to encroach upon or grab the portion of plot no. 3154 beyond the land allowed to them measuring 5 decimals. The remaining portion of the land mentioned in Schedule- C of the plaint. The defendants are thus trying to infringe the title of plaintiffs over the suit land forcibly, encroaching upon the portion of suit land, the plaintiffs advised to file this suit. Cause of action arose on 17.3.2002 within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. The suit was filed on 20.3.2002 and registered as T.S. No. 26 of 2002. CASE OF THE RESPONDENTS;