BISHNU PUTEL Vs. BAJRA PUTEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF is the appellant. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of the plaintiff's title to and confirmation of possession or alternatively recovery of possession of the suit land, and damages. The suit related to 40 decimals out of total 93 decimals in plot No. 731.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case is this: The plaintiff, defendant and others belonged to one joint famaily. There was a separation. The suit plot is said to have been noted in plaintiff's possession in 1936 Settlement and the plaintiff has been paying rent. The note in the record-of-rights Ext. 4 is "jami O. Faldakhal Bishnu Putel. " In 1954 the plaintiff obtained a separate Parcha with regard to plot 731 and other plots, and the plaintiff is paying the rent separately -- a rent receipt being Ext. 6 series. The defendant is said to have cut away trees from the suit land and threatened to dispossess the plaintiff. Thereupon on March 17, 1959 the plaintiff filed this suit for reliefs aforesaid. The defence is that the disputed portion did not relate to plot 731 as alleged : that the defendant is in possession of the disputed portion.

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff on the finding that the disputed area relates to plot 731 and that the plaintiff has title and possession. In appeal, the learned lower appellate Court dismissed the suit an the finding that the disputed portion does not relate to plot No. 731; that the plaintiff failed to prove possession thereof. Hence this Second appeal.