MADHUSUDAN TRIPATHY Vs. NITYANANDA KHARSEL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is the appellant against a confirming judgment. The suit was for declaration of right, title and interest, correction of record of right and eviction of the defendants.

(2.) Case of the plaintiff is that the suit land originally belonged to Machhindra Kharsel-defendant. On 11.5.70, the defendant sold the suit land in favour of the plaintiff by means of a registered sale deed for a consideration of Rs.1600/- and delivered possession. Since then, the plaintiff is in possession of the same. During the current settlement operation, note of possession had been recorded in favour of the defendant. Such recording is incorrect and liable to be deleted. In the event the court finds that the defendant is in possession of the land, he be ejected.

(3.) During pendency of the suit, the defendant died, whereafter his representatives (widow and sons) were substituted. They filed written statement. The case of the defendants was that the original defendantMachhindra had not executed any sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. No consideration was paid. Possession of the land was never delivered to the plaintiff. Sale deed, if any, was forged and fabricated. Machhindra was an illiterate person. He was in possession of the suit land. After him, the defendants are in possession of the suit land. Plaintiff being a Revenue Inspector had managed to get the suit land recorded in his name in the current settlement. It was further pleaded that the suit was not maintainable for non-impletion of the State of Orissa which is a necessary party.