JATIRAM GHARAMI Vs. ATUL KRISHNA DAS KURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals be the unsuccessful defendants are directed against the appellate judgement and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Special Court, Alipore, passed in Title Appeal No. 1093 and Money Appeal No. 98 of 1960, reversing the judgement and decree of the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Baruipur, passed in Title Suit No. 902 and Money Suit No. 138 of 1957 which were tried analogously as the parties were the same and common questions of law and fact were involved. For the same reason, the two appeals were heard analogously by the learned Additional District Judge and were disposed of by a common judgement. Accordingly, these two appeals have been heard together and this judgement will govern both.

(2.) The property involved in Title Suit No. 902 of 1957 comprises five plots of land appertaining to Khatian No. 214, measuring 45 decimals in area. The case of the plaintiffs was that this land, together with certain other lands of Khatian Nos. 21 and 150, were held under them as under-raiyats by Rakhal Das, Fulmani Dasi and Jadunath Gharami at a rental of Rs. 23-5as-6 P. per annum. The plaintiffs instituted a rent suit against them, being Rent Suit No. 2232 of 1931, for recovery of arrears of rent. During the pendency of the suit Rakhal Das died and was substituted by his heirs, defendants Nos. 3 and 4 of the suit. A rent decree was passed in that suit against Fulmani Dasi and Jadunath Gharami, the surviving tenants and defendants 3 and 4 and in Rent Execution Case No. 2966 of 1934 plaintiffs purchased the defaulting holding in Court sale. The sale was confirmed on 20-5-35 and the sale certificate was granted to the plaintiffs on 6-8-35 after the sale became absolute. In execution of the sale certificate, plaintiffs took symbolical possession of the defaulting holding through Court. They then went into khas possession and remained in joint possession of the lands appertaining to the holding till there was a partition between them. Later on, Fulmani and Jadunath also died leaving the remaining defendants as their heirs.

(3.) In the revisional settlement records of rights all the lands of the holding have been duly recorded in the names of the plaintiffs as their khas lands except the suit lands which have been wrongly recorded in the names of the original tenants Rakhal Das, Fulmani Dasi and Jadunath Gharami all of whom died before the settlement operation started. Taking advantage of the erroneous entries in the record of rights the defendants were trying to dispossess them from the suit lands, compelling them to bring the instant suit for declaration of their title to the suit lands, confirmation of their possession and for perpetual injunction.