JAGANNATH JEE Vs. MOHAN MAHARANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Plaintiff's second appeal against the reversing judgment dated 22 -8 -50 of Sri S.K. Mohapatra, 2nd Additional Subordinate Judge of Cuttack. The Plaintiff brought a suit for declaration of his title to the disputed land with a house standing on it and for possession of the same by ejecting the Defendants therefrom and for damages at the rate of Rs. 5/ - p.m. It is the admitted case of both parties that the house in dispute belonged to one Asli Bewa who entered into a contract in writing with Sadananda for sale of the disputed house for a consideration of Rs. 225/ - on 11 -8 -29 Asli Bewa received an advance of Rs. 39/ - towards the consideration money on that date. There was a further renewal of the contract by another document dated 2 -8 -32 as between the same parties, that is Asli and Sadananda, and a further payment of Rs. 17/ - was made towards the consideration money. The Plaintiff's version of the case is that Asli served a registered notice on Sadananda (Exts. 1 and 1 -a) on 6 -9 -33 demanding payment of the balance of the consideration money and registration of the Kabala within seven days from the date of the receipt of the notice, failing which the contract would stand cancelled. Thereafter the Plaintiff purchased the disputed land along with the house by virtue of a registered Kabala from Asli Bewa for a consideration of Rs. 200/ - on 17 -9 -89. Sadananda, who was a party in the suit, died on 28 -4 -42 and his legal representatives have been brought on Record. The other Defendants 2 to 5 are made parties representing the public. The allegation of the Plaintiff is that these Defendants have dispossessed him, the Plaintiff therefore claims for damages and for recovery of possession.

(2.) THE defence is that in fact the contract entered into by the late Sadananda was on behalf of the members of the public and further that the Defendants in their own rights were possessing the disputed house for a very long time and have acquired title by adverse possession. They had taken a plea in the written statement also that the Defendants were entitled to the protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

(3.) SECTION 53A of the Transfer of Property Act runs as follows: