UJALA ROUT Vs. KHALLI JENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LISIN the these two First Appeals commenced as long back as in the year 1969. These two First Appeals are also pending since last more than two decades. We felt that any more delay in disposal of the Appeals would virtually cause denial of justice. The Appeals were taken up for hearing in spite of some preliminary objections and are heard at length. As both the First Appeals involve common facts and are out of one judgment, the same are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) BEREFT of all necessary details, the short facts which are necessary for effectual adjudication of the two Appeals are stated herein below : Admittedly, the lands in dispute appertaining to Survey Nos. 123/1, 121/4 and 78/2 under Patta No. 148, situated at village Adduapada in Badakhemindi Tahasil were part and parcel of the Intermediary estate of Sri Ramachandra Deo, Ex Intermediary of Badakhemindi. On promulgation of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the OEA Act') the Estate of Badakhemindi vested with the State Government free from all encumbrances with effect from June 1st, 1953. After the lands were settled in favour of the Ex Intermediary, he alienated the same in favour of 27 persons by means of a registered sale deed. In the year 1968, inter se dispute for possession over the disputed lands cropped up between the parties, which culminated in initiation of a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P.C. registered as Misc. Case No. 259 of 1968 in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Berhampur. The said case was partly allowed in favour of the members of First party and partly in favour of the members of Second party, inasmuch as the members of the First party were held to be in possession of two plots and the members of the Second party were held to be in possession in respect of three plots. Being aggrieved by the said order, the members of the First party, (27 in number), filed Title Suit No. 39 of 1969 in the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Berhampur as plaintiffs against 126 defendants who were members of the Second party, inter alia, praying for declaration of their title in respect of the suit scheduled lands for recovery of possession and for realisation of a sum of Rs. 2,700/ lying in deposit in the Court of the Magistrate, First Class, Berhampur as well as for other ancillary reliefs. The members of the second party (numbering 126) who are defendants in T.S. No. 39 of the 1969 also filed a separate suit, which was registered as T.S.No. 43 Of 1969 as plaintiffs impleading 27 First party members (who are plaintiffs in T.S. No. 39 of 1969) as defendants, inter alia, praying for declaration of their right, title and interest over the entire suit scheduled properties and for other ancillary reliefs. The plaintiffs in T.S. No. 39 of 1969 averred in their plaint that the lands in dispute, comprising of cultivable lands and Mango topes, were private or 'Hetta' lands of the Ex Intermediary of Badakhemindi, and were in his Khas possession. In the settlement records also the said lands stood recorded as the private lands of Rama Chandra Deo, the Ex Intermediary. After promulgation of the O. E. A. Act in 1953, the concerned authorities after observing all paraphernalia settled the lands in favour of the Ex Intermediary. For meeting certain legal expenses, the Ex Intermediary Sri Rama Chandra Deo, alienated the disputed lands along with some other lands appertaining to Survey Nos. 122/4 and 48/4 (which are not subject matter of the suit) to the 26 plaintiffs for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/ under a registered sale deed dated August 13, 1968 and delivered possession of the same. It is averred that die plaintiffs from the date of their purchase, were in cultivating possession of the land and were enjoying the same exclusively as rightful owners thereof and exercised various rights. The defendants, Ujala Rout and four others wanted to purchase the lands from Ramachandra Deo. Ex Intermediary, but as the said Ex Intermediary did not agree to sell the lands to them and sold the same to plaintiffs, they became enraged and out of frustration, instigated other defendants (villagers) and trespassed upon the suit land with an intention to harass and cause loss to the plaintiffs who were bona fide purchasers for value and were in possession. The plaintiffs, had not other way but to initiate a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P.C. After disposal of the said proceeding, they filed the aforesaid suit.

(3.) AT the cost of repetition, it is once again reiterated that the defendants of T.S. No. 39 of 1969 are the plaintiffs of T.S. No. 43 of 1969 and the averments made in their plaint are virtually repetition of the averments made in written statement filed by them in T.S. No. 39 of 1969. Similarly, the plaintiffs of T.S. No. 39 of 1969 are the defendants of T.S. No. 43 of 1969 and their written statement is in the same light as their plaint in T. S. No. 39 of 1969.