JAGANNATH Vs. RADHESHYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Final hearing of this second appeal has been taken-up through video conferencing.

(2.) The substantial questions of law involved, formulated and to be answered in this second appeal preferred by the appellants/defendants are as under:-

(3.) The dispute relates to the property left by Parau and his wife Sumrit Bai. They had four daughters namely Samundra Kunwar (defendant No.1 is her son), Badki Kani (defendant No.2), Majhali Kani (defendant No.3) and Chotkikani @ Nanki Kani (defendant No.4) and plaintiffRadheshyam is son of Chotkikani @ Nankikani. PlaintiffRadheshyam filed a suit for permanent injunction and in alternative, restoration of possession pleading interalia that the suit property was originally held by Parau and he was in possession of the suit property during his life time. Parau & his wife Sumrit both have died and the plaintiff and the defendants became titleholders of the suit property. It was further pleaded that he is son of Majhalikani and defendants No.2 to 4 have surrendered their share in the suit land at the time of marriage vide Exs.P-3 to P-5 and since 1990, the plaintiff is in cultivating possession of the suit land and he has perfected his title by way of adverse possession. Since the defendants got their names mutated in revenue records, necessity has arisen to file a suit for permanent injunction and in alternative, recovery for possession of the suit land.