CHANDAN KUMAR JANA Vs. KANAKLATA PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and final decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, 1st Court, Contai in Title suit no. 112 of 1999 on 10/4/2000 and 20/7/2009 respectively. For proper appreciation of the lis, facts in brief are indicated herein below.

(2.) The suit property was originally owned by Haraprosad Giri, Panchanan Giri and Banabehari Giri having 1/3rd share each. After the demise of Banabehari Giri his 1/3rd share devolved upon the son Subimal Giri and two daughters i.e. defendant no. 8 and predecessor of defendant nos. 3 to 7. The defendant no. 1 purchased the share of Subimal Giri, the son of Banabehari Giri. The 1/3rd share of Haraprosad Giri was acquired by his son Adhar Giri and after his death Lalmohan Giri and Bablu Giri two sons of Adhar Giri, Rohini Giri, the widow and Sandhyarani Giri, the daughter acquired said 1/3rd share of Adhar Giri. The plaintiff purchased the share of Sandhyarani Giri and Rohini Giri on 13/2/1998. The defendant no. 1 purchased the share of Bablu Giri and Lalmohan Giri.

(3.) The defendant nos. 1 and 2 contested the suit by filing written statement denying all allegations made against them. It is their specific case that defendant no. 1 purchased entire 1/3rd share of Banabehari from his legal heirs and also purchased half share of Hiranmay i.e. the son of Adhar and defendant no. 2 purchased 18 decimal of land from the son of Panchanan thus jointly they acquired 95 1/2 decimal of land. The defendants further contended that the plaintiff has been possessing the western portion of suit plot while they have been possessing the eastern portion. The defendants adverted further that defendant nos. 3 to 8 do not have any right title interest over the suit property. The defendants also expressed their willingness to get the property partitioned.