LAWS(ORI)-2016-10-3

STATE OF ORISSA Vs. P.S.N.RAO

Decided On October 05, 2016
STATE OF ORISSA Appellant
V/S
P.S.N.Rao Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiff's appeal against a reversing judgment in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that the Government of Orissa had issued notifications for acquisition of the suit schedule land for the purpose of construction of M.K.C.G. Medical College, Berhampur. The suit land had been recorded in the name of Government of Orissa in the Department of Health and Family Planning. The final R.O.R. was published in the year 1979. The boundary wall of the Medical College had been constructed over the suit land. On 28.10.1996, the defendant had damaged the boundary wall of the Medical College and started construction over the same. The plaintiff informed the matter to the police about the illegal entry of the defendant over the suit land. The defendant has no semblance of right, title and interest over the suit land.

(3.) Pursuant to issuance of summons, the defendant entered appearance and filed a written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint. It is stated that his mother P.Managmma purchased the suit lands from one Tulasi Patra and Purna Chandra Mohanty under three registered sale deeds and remained in possession of the same. The plaintiff had not acquired the suit land at any point of time, nor possessed the same. During the last settlement operation, the suit lands were wrongly recorded in the name of the plaintiff. It is further stated that he and his family members were staying away from Berhampur. When he learnt about the wrong recording of the suit land in the name of plaintiff, he filed a petition before the Tahasildar to mutate the suit land in his favour. The Tahasildar demanded a no objection certification from the plaintiff. The plaintiff, after discovering that the suit land had not been acquired and included in the Master Plan for Medical College, tried to ascertain from the Revenue authorities and the Land Acquisition Authority about the real position and when the authority reported that the lands had not been acquired, the suit was filed.