STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. SUBIMAL KUMAR MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has alleged that the disputed land belonged to the minor, Satyendra Nath Patra. The latter's father acted as his guardian and for the benefit of the minor son, sold the disputed property to him on the 7th Dec., 1953, for Rs. 250/-. After making the purchase he has been possessing the property. But in the R.S. Khatian there is a wrong entry that the property belongs to his father and that land has vested in the State. The plaintiff's father did not make any purchase, The suit is for an injunction on declaration of the plaintiff's title and for a further declaration that the entry in the record-of-rights is incorrect.

(2.) Defendant No. 1 is the State of West Bengal. A written statement was filed denying the plaintiff's allegations. It has been stated that defendant No. 2, plaintiff's father, was a big raiyat and he made a Benami purchase. He did not retain the suit-land. That property has vested in the State.

(3.) The learned Munsif disbelieved the plaintiff's version in all respects and has held that the plaintiff had no money to make the purchase. That purchase was not a genuine one. The plaintiff was not in possession of the property. The dakhilas filed by him were interpolated. The plaintiff has no title. The suit was dismissed. The plaintiff went up in appeal. The appellate Court decreed the suit by allowing the appeal. Hence this appeal by the State.