SRIDHAR SENAPATI Vs. GOBINDA CHANDRA MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 2nd appeal has been admitted on the following questions of law:

(2.) ONE Kahnei was the ancestor. He had two sons, Raghu and Madha, Chintamani, the son of Madha, predeceased him leaving behind his widow, gandei. Madha also died in the year 1916 -17. On the other hand, Raghu had one son, Fakira had two sons, namely, Baraju and Banamali is the Plaintiff, Gopinath, Son of Baraju, is Defendant No.11 Chintamani died without any issue. So after the death of Chintamani and Madha, Gandai was left alone. She could no adjust herself with Raghu, Fakira and his sons and therefore, she was given AC.3.16 decimals of land for her maintenance. Taking advantage of her possession, Gandai allegedly managed to record her name in respect thereof in the settlement in the year 1921.

(3.) THE Plaintiff further pleaded that Gandei expired on 26.01.1981 leaving behind the original Appellant as her heir. The right of the Plaintiff - Appellant over the suit land accrued in the year 1981. So he filed the suit for declaration of his title, for confirmation of possession over the suit land or in the alternative for delivery of possession and for perpetual injunction with respect to the suit land described in schedule 'Kha' of the plaint.