PANU BEHERA Vs. JITENDRIYA DAS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Second Appeal is by Defendant No. 2 against a decree of reversal. The suit was for a declaration of the Plaintiff's sthitiban right over the suit lands on adjudication that neither the Defendants nor their predecessors -in -interest were sikimi tenants under the Plaintiff at any time, for confirmation or in the alternative recovery of possession and also for recovery of a sum of Rs. 350/ - as damages.

(2.) THE suit lands appertain to plot Nos. 1106 and 1107 of the Major Settlement of 1966 which correspond to plot Nos. 791 and 792 respectively of the Current Settlement of 1927. In the GS record of rights finally published in 1927 the Plaintiffs father has been recorded as a sthitiban raiyat in respect of plot Nos. 791 and 792. There is a note of possession against plot No. 792 in the remarks column in favour of Saradi Bewa, widow of late Madhu Behera as sikimi mahdar -vide Ext. G. But in the Major Settlement record -of -rights finally published on 21st October, 1966 plot Nos. 1106 and 1107 have been recorded in the name of Padia Behera son of Achyut Behera as sikimi Nisakar vide Ext. 1. In the record -of -rights finally published under Section 22 of the Orissa Consolidation of Holding and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 plot Nos. 848 and 84 (sic) which correspond to Major Settlement plot Nos. 1106 and 1107 respectively have been recorded in the name of Defendant No. 1 and her sons and daughters as sikimi nisakar.

(3.) THE stand taken by the Defendants is that their ancestor Madhu Behera was in possession of the suit lands as a sikimi tenant and after his death his widow. Saradi Bewa and son Achyut Behera possessed the same as sikimi tenants. After the death of Achyut his son Padia continued to possess the same as a sikimi tenant and after his death the Defendants have been possessing the same as such. The other allegations made in the plaint were denied.