PITAMBAR GIRI Vs. BISHNUPADA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants are the appellants against a reversing judgment in a suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and permanent injunction.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit of the plaintiff by filing their joint written statement taking their stand inter alia therein that, though Krushna Das had executed the gift deed on dtd. 29/8/1982 in respect of the suit property in favour of the vendors plaintiff, i.e., Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das, but, Krushna Das, had not delivered the possession thereof to Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das. For which, that gift deed was not a complete gift deed. Therefore, Krushna Das had cancelled/revoked that gift deed through a Registered Deed of cancellation/revocation on dtd. 22/11/1989. So, by that gift deed vide Ext.8, no interest over any portion of the suit property was created in favour of Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das, because the title and possession of the suit property was as usual with Krushna Das. Therefore, Krushna Das being the exclusive owner of the suit property sold away the same to the defendants through R.S.D. No.552 dtd. 21/3/1992 vide Ext. B and delivered possession thereof to them (defendants). Accordingly, they (defendants) are possessing the suit property as the owners thereof. The plaintiff has no right, title, interest and possession on the same. The further case of the defendants was that, as the original owner of the suit property, i.e., Krushna Das has cancelled the deed of gift vide Ext-8 through the registered deed of cancellation/revocation on dtd. 22/11/1989, for which, no right, title, interest and possession in respect of the suit property was created in favour of Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das. Because, the said gift deed vide Ext.8 in favour of Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das was void and in operative one. When the gift Deed vide Ext.8 in favour of Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das was void, then, the sale deeds executed by the said Judhistir Das and Bhima Charan Das in respect of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff vide Exts.2 and 4 are also void automatically. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to get any interest on the suit property through the aforesaid void deeds vide Exts.2 and 4. So, in their written statement, the defendants filed counter claim against the plaintiff praying for declaration of their right, title, interest over the suit property and confirmation of their possession on the same and also to declare the RoR prepared in favour of the plaintiff on the strength of the sale deeds vide Exts.2 and 4 wrong and to injunct the plaintiff permanently from entering upon the suit property along with costs thereof.

(3.) Basing upon the aforesaid pleadings and matters in controversies between the parties, altogether seven numbers of issues were framed and the said issues are:-