BABAJI DEHURI Vs. BIRANCHI ANANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Some of the defendants are the appellants against the affirming appellate decision. Plaintiffs-respondents 1 and 2 had filed the suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession, or in the alternative, recovery of possession in respect of the disputed land as described in plaint 'Ka' Schedule and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from entering upon the disputed land.

(2.) Briefly stated, the case of the plaintiffs is as follows: The disputed 'Ka' schedule land originally belonged to Radhu Dehury (defendant No. 1). The plaintiffs purchased the said land in the year 1977 under a registered sale deed and remained in possession. Subsequently, the plaintiffs purchased another piece of land adjacent to the disputed land in the year 1980. In the year 1981, they learnt that the plot number and khata number as indicated in the sale deed in respect of the disputed land were not correct. Thereafter the plaintiffs sent notice to defendant No. 1 to rectify the mistakes, but defendant No. 1 did not pay any heed to such notice and, on the other hand, sold the very same land to defendants 2 to 34 by executing a sale deed on 15-4-1981. Thereafter on the basis of the subsequent sale deed, defendants 2 to 34 tried to disturb the possession of the plaintiffs for which the plaintiffs had to file the suit.

(3.) Defendants 2 to 34 filed a joint written statement denying the allegations made in the plaint. They took the plea that there was no mistake in the sale deed executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of the plaintiffs. It was further pleaded that defendants 2 to 34 after purchasing the land in 1981 had acquired valid title and were in possession. The question of limitation was also raised. Defendant No. 1 in a separate written statement challenged the assertions made by the plaintiffs and supported the case of defendants 2 to 34.