(1.) Special leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the contesting parties finally in this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is being finally disposed of by this judgment.
(2.) This appeal by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution involves a short question about the review jurisdiction of the High Court in setting aside the earlier decision of the High Court in Second Appeal No.569 of 1973. A few relevant facts leading up to this appeal are required to be noticed at the outset. The appellant is the original plaintiff who had filed a title suit No. 67 of 1970 in the second Court of the learned Subordinate Judge at Midnapore in West Bengal. In that suit, the appellant- plaintiff claimed partition and separate possession of two plots, namely , C.S.Plots Nos.73 and 74. Her case was that her husband Dr. Umaprasanna Bhanja and respondent-defendant's husband Dr.Phanindra Nath Choudhury were close friends, that by two registered documents they had purchased the aforesaid two plots and that the plaintiff-appellant became entitled to the northern halves of the two plots totalling. 10 decimals. Her case is that the parties dug a well in the middle portion of the respective plots. It was further contended that the defendant-respondent in disregard of the plaintiff-appellant's interests, started construction of some buildings, encroaching upon her area. Consequently, the aforesaid suit was filed claiming partition of two plots by metes and bounds. The plaintiff- appellant alternatively prayed for declaration of title and sought permanent injunction in respect of C.S. Plots Nos.73 and 74.
(3.) The learned trial Judge by his Judgment and decree dated 15th March,1971, held that the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to partition of C.S.Plots No.73 and so far as C. S. Plot No. 74 was concerned the appellant was held entitled to a decree of declaration of title in respect of specific 5 decimals of land and permanent injunction against the defendant to that extent.