SATYA SAHUANI Vs. CHUDAMANI SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Baragarh on 18-11-80 in T.S. No. 46 of 1977 allowing amendment of the written statement. The plaintiff is the petitioner.

(2.) The facts in brief may be stated. Trilochan was the owner in possession of schedule 'A' land of the plaint which consisted of a homestead in village Talpadar with a length of 27 cubits from east to west, 20 cubits from north to south on the eastern side and 18 cubits on the western side. There was a dwelling house and a cow-shed thereon. After death of Trilochan, his widow Mst. Sanatara remained in occupation thereof. She died in 1971 leaving the petitioner and her deceased sister who was the mother of opposite party No. 2 defendant. The suit land thereafter came to be jointly possessed by the petitioner and her sister and after her death by opposite party No. 2. In 1976 opposite party No. 2 executed a plain paper sale deed without passing of consideration in favour of opposite party No. 1-defendant in respect of the suit land whereafter, opposite party No. 1 demolished the cow-shed and in its place hurriedly constructed a house. There had been no partition of the suit property between the petitioner and opposite party No. 2. Consequent upon the alleged sale and danger to her share in the suit property the petitioner instituted a suit (T. S.46 of 1977) with the following prayers :

(3.) Opposite party No. 1 raised the plea in the written statement that Trilochan was the owner of a portion of schedule 'A' land of the plaint. The portion in his possession was 9 cubits on the northern side adjoining the road, 18 cubits on the southern side adjoining the house of Kanhei Misra and 20 cubits on the eastern side adjoining the road. After his death Mst. Sanatara succeeded and was in possession of the aforesaid portion out of schedule 'A' Land. When she died opposite party No. 2 remained in exclusive possession thereof. On 15-3-1976 he sold the same in favour of opposite party No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 3000/-accompanied by delivery of possession. In evidence of the transaction, he executed an unregistered sale deed and promised to execute and register a sale deed in his favour. Since the sale, opposite party No. 1 is in possession of the portion of schedule 'A' land described above.