GOPAL DEBNATH Vs. NABADWIP CHANDRA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 100 of CPC is preferred challenging the judgment dtd. 31/3/2023 and consequential decree dtd. 1/4/2023 delivered by Learned District Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in connection with case No.TA No.17 of 2019. By the said judgment and decree, Learned 1st Appellate Court has upheld the judgment dtd. 31/7/2019 and decree dtd. 6/8/2019 delivered by Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), South Tripura, Belonia in connection with case No.TS No.44 of 2015.

(2.) Heard Learned Counsel Mr. Dilip Kumar Daschowdhury appearing on behalf of the appellant-defendant and also heard Learned Counsel, Mr. Alik Das along with Learned Counsel, Mr. Ashutosh De appearing on behalf of the contesting respondentplaintiffs.

(3.) Before proceeding with the merit of the appeal let us discuss about the subject matter of the dispute amongst the rival parties. The predecessor of the respondents as plaintiffs filed one suit before the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), South Tripura, Belonia which was numbered as TS No.44 of 2015 against the defendant i.e. the present appellant herein for declaration of right, title and interest and also for recovery of possession. It was alleged in the plaint that in the year 1990 vide allotment order No.182 dtd. 30/12/1990, the respondent-plaintiffs were given allotment by the Government for the land measuring 2.63 acres and the plaintiffs possessed the same without any hindrances and interruption. It was further asserted that during the revisional survey and settlement operation, the names of the respondent-plaintiffs were duly recorded in the finally published khatian but on 1/6/2015 the defendant i.e. the appellant herein along with some of the local hooligans entered into the suit land of the respondent-plaintiffs and planted some cashew nut trees therein. As both the respondent-plaintiffs are old aged persons with a physically handicapped son so they failed to resist the defendantappellant. In this regard, various communications were made to the District Magistrate & Collector for protecting their person and property but no response was taken. Hence the respondent-plaintiffs have filed the suit for declaration of right, title and interest and for recovery of possession.