MANJULATA BEDANTA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant against an affirming judgment.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that the suit land though recorded in the name of Bharata Samrat, it was in khas possession of the Ex-intermediaries, namely, Ananda Mohan Das, Pyari Mohan Das, Lal Mohan Das and Khetra Mohan Das. In 1944 the aforementioned persons orally leased out the suit land to Bholanath Ray, the adopted father of the plaintiff. He reclaimed the suit land and was in possession of the same. Thereafter he constructed a house over it. Bholanath Ray was a bachelor. On 17.10.1974 he adopted the plaintiff as his daughter. The factum of adoption was confirmed by decree of the Civil Court in Title Suit No.1004 of 1993- 1. After coming into force of the Estate Abolition Act in 1951, the suit land vested in the State of Orissa. The father of the plaintiff was in possession over the suit land on the date of vesting. He remained in possession of the land even after vesting. On 15.1.1963, the R.I asked her father to vacate the suit land, but he refused. Her father died in the year 1993. By that time she married. She was residing in the house built by her father over the suit land. She used to pay electricity charges. She was also paying holding tax to the Municipality, Balasore. While the matter stood thus, she visited the office of the R.I to pay rent of the suit land, but the R.I. refused to receive the same on the ground that the suit land had been recorded in the name of State. She obtained the certified copy of the R.O.R of the suit land and came to know that the suit land had been recorded in the name of the State with a note of forcible possession of her father Bholanath Ray in the remarks column. Notice under Section 80 of C.P.C was sent to respondent no.1 for correction of the record of right of the suit land. Instead of correcting the R.O.R., the Tahasildar, Balasore initiated an encroachment case against her vide L.E.Case No.1887 of 1993. With this factual scenario, the suit has been filed for declaration of right, title, interest, confirmation of possession and for a further declaration that the order passed in the encroachment case by the Tahasildar, Balasore is void and inoperative.

(3.) Pursuant to issuance of notice, defendant no.1 entered appearance and filed a written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint. The case of the defendant no.1 is that the Ex-Landlord had not settled the suit land in favour of Bholanath Ray. No Raffa was submitted by the Ex-landlord in favour of Bholanath Ray. No T.L. was opened in the name of Bholanath Ray. The suit land was not in the possession of Bholanath Ray or by the plaintiff. In the M.S. operation, the suit land has been included in the "Sarbasadharana" khata no. 334 of the State with illegal note of possession of Bholanath Ray. The M.S. R.O.R of the suit land was finally published on 30.08.1986. Neither Bholanath Ray nor the plaintiff challenged the M.S. R.O.R within three years of its final publication. The suit was barred under Section 42 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act. As the plaintiff was in illegal possession the suit land, L.E.Case No. 1587 of 1993 was initiated against her. She was evicted from the suit land under due process of law. On the date of institution of the suit, the plaintiff was not in possession over the suit land. The defendant no.1 denied the right, title and interest of the plaintiff and further pleaded that the suit was barred under Section 16 of the O.P.L.E. Act.