HARIPADA JANA Vs. REBATI BERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12th February, 2009 and 12th March 2009 respectively passed by the Additional District Judge, 4th Court at Paschim Medinipur in Title Appeal No.18 of 2008 affirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Dantan, Paschim Medinipur on 28th July, 2007 in Title Suit No.251 of 1992.

(2.) The defendant is the appellant before this Court. The respondents as plaintiffs filed Title Suit No.251 of 1992 praying for a decree of declaration and permanent injunction against the defendant stating, inter alia, that one Trailakyo Jashu, since deceased was the recorded owner in respect of the suit schedule property. After the death of the said Trailakyo Jashu, his widow namely, Tiliottama Jashu and only daughter Smt. Rebati Bera (plaintiff No.1) inherited the suit schedule property. Subsequently, the said Tillottama had also expired and the plaintiff No.1 became the absolute owner in respect of the suit schedule property by way of inheritance. She has been possessing the said property along with other co-sharers. While possessing the suit schedule property, plaintiff No.1 transferred a specific portion of the said property in favour of her son, plaintiff No.2 by executing a registered deed of gift dated 17th November, 1991. The defendant, all on a sudden, sometimes in the month of Kartik 1899 BS, claimed ownership over the suit schedule property and tried to dispossess the plaintiffs. The defendant has or had no right, title and possession over the suit schedule property. It was ascertained from the written statement filed by the defendant that Smt. Tillottama Jashu allegedly transferred some portion of the suit schedule property to the defendant by a registered deed of conveyance dated 26th November, 1982. However, it was pleaded by the plaintiffs by way of amendment of plaint that the said Tillottama died on 16th May, 1982. Therefore, the defendant's claim of having ownership over the suit property on the strength of a deed of conveyance dated 27th November, 1982 is false, frivolous and not binding upon the parties. If at all any such deed is in existence, it was not executed and registered by Tillottama and the defendant got it executed in his name by false impersonation showing some other lady as Tillottama.

(3.) Defendant No.1 contested the said suit by filling written statement. The defendant denied the case of the plaintiff. It is specifically pleaded by the defendant that during his life time, said Trailakyo Jashu, since deceased transferred 111/4 decimal of land in plot No.267, 6? ? decimal of land in plot No.819, 02 decimal of land in plot No.239, 3? ? decimal of land in plot No.268 and 02 decimal of land in plot No.253 by a registered deed of gift dated 17th November, 1978 to his wife Tillottama Jashu. The said Tillottama sold out the above stated property to the defendant by executing a registered deed of sale on 26th November, 1982. It is also stated by the defendant that during his life time Trailakyo Jashu transferred some portions of plot Nos.1235, 249, 229 and 265 to the defendant by a registered deed of sale dated 25th September, 1978. The defendant also claimed that he is in possession of the certain portions of land in plot Nos.244, 246, 251 and 238 since 25th September, 1978 openly, adversely and against the interest of the original owners without any interruption and thereby acquired title by adverse possession. Thus, the defendant had prayed for dismissal of the suit.