BIDULATA ALIAS BIDYUTLATA DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Writ Applications have been filed inter alia challenging the orders passed by the authorities under the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act (hereinafter called 'the Consolidation Act for the sake of brevity) annexed as Annexures - 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Annexure -1 is the judgment/order dated 18.10.1985 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Gop -Kakatpur in the district of Puri. Annexure -2 is the appellate order dated 28.10.1986 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Puri and Annexure -3 is the order dated 27.2.1999 passed by the revisional authority, i.e. the Commissioner of Consolidation, Orissa.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY one Sania Bhoi, son of Bidya Bhoi and Saratia Bhoi, son of Bhima Bhoi were the recorded tenants in respect of the disputed lands. In the year 1928 by a registered deed, Sania gifted the lands belonging to him to his sisters son Lokanath, son of Saratia. In 1939, said Lokanath by a registered sale deed transferred the lands in favour of Radhashyam. It is stated that the said sale deed was a nominal one and was executed to avoid attachment of the property in a civil suit. In 1979 said Radhashyam again sold back the lands in favour of Lokanath by a registered sale deed. On 29.5.1979 Lokanath sold some lands to one Brahmananda. When the matter stood thus, Sania died leaving behind his widow Radhi only. On 30.11.1934 Radhi sold the lands to one Gopi Singh. It appears that Gopi Singh transferred the lands to one Sayed Abdul Waheb Ali Saha and others on 17.7.1966. The contesting opposite parties claim that they have obtained the lands from said Sayed Abdul Waheb Ali Saha, got the same mutated in their names and paid rent. It is further averred that in the year 1974 the disputed lands vested with the State under the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act and the ex landlord submitted rent roll in favour of Sayed Abdul Waheb Ali Saha and Ratnakar Sahu and since then they have been recognised as tenants under the State. It is also submitted that in a proceeding initiated under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, possession of the contesting opposite parties has been declared.

(3.) THE Consolidation Officer heard all the Objection Cases together and disposed of the same by a common judgment/order dated 18.10.1985, Annexure -1. He held the gift deed executed by Sania in favour of Lokanath to be valid and genuine and to have been acted upon. He also found that no rent was paid by Lokanath or Radhashyam and Radhi had no title to convey in favour of Gopi and the property was gifted by her husband Sania prior to his death. He also found that Gopi Singh had forcibly possessed the lands for more than the statutory period of limitation and had acquired title over the same by adverse possession. With the aforesaid findings the Consolidation Officer held that the contesting opposite parties who claimed right through Gopi Singh had acquired title and he directed to record the lands covering L.R. plot Nos. 6694, 6742, 6743, 4246 and 3739 in their favour. He also directed to record L.R. plot No. 3738 in the name of Ratnakar.