MAGU SAHU Vs. BHRAMARBARA BEHERA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF is the Appellant against a confirming decision in a suit for permanent injunction. Plaintiff 's case was that plot No. 909 having an area of 0.18 acre and plot No. 970 having an area of 0.24 acre appertaining to Khata No. 210/12 were Anabadi lands of the ex -landlords, namely Khemendranath Tagore, Hemendranath Tagore and the Raja of Kanika. In 1941, the Plaintiff took permanent lease of these two plots from the ex -landlords and since then he has been in exclusive possession of the same on payment of rent. After abolition of estates, the Plaintiff has been recognised as a tenant in respect of the suit plots by the State Government and he has also been paying rent. The Defendants threatened to interfere with the possession of the Plaintiff over the suit plots and hence he filed the suit for injunction.

(2.) THE trial Court as well as the appellate Court have discussed the materials available on record and have come to a definite conclusion that Plaintiff has failed to establish his possession over the suit property. This being a finding of fact, cannot be interfered with in Second Appeal. Nothing has been placed before me to reject this finding has been placed before me to reject this finding. When Plaintiff has failed to establish his possession, a pure suit for injunction is not maintainable. The injunction prayed for in the suit is that the Defendants be restrained from interfering with the possession of the Plaintiff.

(3.) A feeble attempt has been made on behalf of the Plaintiff that Gajendra Bastia was the Gumasta of all the three landlords and he has settled the land on behalf of the landlords in favour of the Plaintiff. This contention on behalf of the Plaintiff is contrary to what has been stated by the Plaintiff in Court. There is no such contention in his plaint. This appears to be a subsequent attempt made by the Plaintiff. Even assuming that Gajendra Bastia settled the land in favour of the Plaintiff, in absence of any proof or authority in favour of Gajendra Bastia by all the ex -proprietors to lease out the land, no interest can be created in favour of the Plaintiff in the suit land.