GOLAK CHANDRA BHADRA Vs. CHINTAMANI BHADRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9 have preferred this appeal against the decision of the Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara affirming the decision of the trial court declaring the plaintiff's title and possession over the suit land.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case, bereft of the unnecessary details and relevant for the points raised in this second appeal, is as follows:-In the year 1924 Biswanath, Damo-dar. Jagabandhu and Radheshyam purchased the sikmi right in the suit land from one Chaitan Samal, and thereafter in the year 1928, they purchased the occupancy right in respect of the same land from one Khetrabasi Bhadra. The land remained vacant even after its purchase by the above named four persons, and as the plaintiff wanted the said land to build a cow-shed thereon. Biswanath Damodar. Jagabandhu and Radheshyam sole the suit land orally to him for a consideration of Rs. 40/-, about 25-26 years prior to the institution of the suit. As the vendors were rich and influential persons and were not willing to execute a sale deed in that respect, and as the said purchase was for Rs. 40/- and delivery of possession of the suit land was given to the plaintiff in accordance with the said sale, the sale was not effected by a registered document. The plaintiff, after purchasing the suit land, built a cow-shed thereon towards its southern side and planted cocoanut trees on the rest of the land. In and from the year 1958 the defendants created disturbance in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff due to which there were criminal cases between the parties. Being thus disturbed in his possession the plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession, and for recovery of Rs. 300/- towards damages caused to the plaintiff by demolishing the structure on the suit land and by removing the materials thereof. In the alternative the plaintiff also claimed right over the suit land by adverse possession.

(3.) DEFENDANTS 3 and 4 contested the suit by filing a joint written statement. Defendant No. 2 subsequently appeared in the suit and adopted the written statement filed by defendants 3 and 4. Other defendants did not appear and were set ex parte. The above mentioned contesting defendants admitted that the suit land was purchased in the year 1924 by Biswanath. Damodar. Jagabandhu, the three brothers, along with Radheshyam. The above mentioned three brothers had half share and Radheshyam alone had half share in the said property. They denied the plaintiff's above mentioned case of purchasing the suit land by oral sale and his claim to possess the same. They claimed to be in possession of the suit land by keeping their cattle in the shed standing thereon and by planting cocoanut trees on the vacant portion of the same. They averred that their pre-decessors-ininterest were in possession of the suit land from 1924. and the defendants reconstructed the structure standing thereon in the year 1958. Other plaint allegations were also denied.