BAURIBANDHU MOHANTY Vs. RAGHUNATH PANIGRAHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff in Title Suit No. 29 of 1979 of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur has filed this appeal against the reversing judgment and decree passed by the appellate Court by which his suit for declaration of title, confirmation and/or recovery of possession and for permanent injunction was dismissed.

(2.) It is alleged in the plaint that the suit property once belonged to Bhimsen Panigrahi, who sold the same to one Kisanlal Sharma for consideration. Thereafter the vendee Kishanlal Sharma was in possession of the suit land in his own right and got it mutated in his name. Kishanlal Sharma left Rairakhol in the year 1954 and before his departure he orally transferred the suit land to the plaintiff for which he claimed to have been in possession of the suit land since 1954 onwards and had mutated the land in his favour. It has been further alleged that the plaintiff constructed a house over a portion of the suit land and has been living therein. The defendants having no matter of right, title, interest and possession of the suit land had created disturbance in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff, therefore, he filed the suit for the aforesaid relief.

(3.) The respondent-defendants have, inter alia, alleged that the defendants have never sold the land to Kishanlal Sharma nor the said Kishanlal Sharma had orally sold the suit land to the plaintiff. It has been alleged in the written statement that Bhimsen Panigrahi agreed to sell the entire extent of the suit land measuring A.3.40 decimals to Kishanlal Sharma and Monoharlal Sharma, but the transaction could not be materialised since the vendee could not arrange the consideration amount. Thus the original owner Bhimsen Panigrahi continued to possess the land till his death and was paying rent in lieu of his occupation. But the plaintiff, however, made a request to Bhimsen Panigrahi to permit him to construct a house over A.0.10 decimals of land some time in 1970 for a consideration of Rs. 300/- and as such the defendant-respondents permitted him to reside therein. Thus the defendant-respondents prayed for dismissal of the suit.