SHYAMA SAHU Vs. ANAM SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is a defendant No. 1's appeal against the affirming decree of the Learned Additional District Judge, Puri, in a suit for title and possession of the Ka Schedule property on the basis of two purchases from the defendant No. 2 under Exts. 2 and 2/a dated 28-6-1965. Alternatively, the Kha Schedule property in which the Ka Schedule property is included was asked to be partitioned and the property in the Ka schedule was asked to be allotted to the Plaintiff in view of the purchases.

(2.) The Defendant No. 2, the Plaintiff's vendor, supported the Plaint claim. The defendant No. 1 pleaded that the property was the absolute Debottar of the Deity Bhagbat Dev and the palm-leaf books were being worshipped. As such the property was not alienable and the Deity has no interest to alienate the property nor was the Deity benefited by the alienation. Thus the Plaintiff acquired no title under Exts. 2 and 2/a.

(3.) The Courts below have found that the defendant No. 1 has failed to establish the existence of a Deity known as Sri Bhagbat Dev as pleaded in paragraph 3 of the written statement of defendant No. 1. They have reached the further finding that the disputed property was a nominal Debottar and hence was transferable. In an amicable partition, the Ka Schedule property stood allotted to the share of the defendant No. 2 and he was thus competent to alienate good title in favour of the Plaintiff.