LAWS(ORI)-1987-3-26

DAMA MEHER Vs. CHAMPESWAR BENTKAR AND ORS.

Decided On March 18, 1987
Dama Meher Appellant
V/S
Champeswar Bentkar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT No. 1 is the Appellant against a confirming judgment in a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession.

(2.) PLAINTIFFS ' case, shortly stated, is that the land belonged to one Asaram, who had two sons, Udhab and Brahma. Udhab died leaving behind Bhuleswar and Champeswar. Champeswar is Plaintiff No. 1. Bhuleswar died leaving behind his widow Duti and Duti is Defendant No. 2. Champeswar 's two sons are Plaintiffs 2 and 3 respectively whereas Brahma is Plaintiff No. 4. After death of Bhuleswar, sometime in the year 1960. Champeswar (Plaintiff No. 1) and Duti (Defendant No. 2) conveyed the suit land under a registered sale deed dated 30 -3 -1964 (Ext. A) for a consideration of Rs. 3,000/ -. It is alleged in the plaint that Champeswar and Duti were illiterate and taking advantage of their illiteracy, Defendant No. 1 got the registered sale deed from them giving them an impression that it was a lease deed for a term of ten years. After 1974, when the Plaintiffs ' went upon the suit land. .Defendant No. 1 credited trouble and declared that he had purchased the suit land. No permission having been taken from the competent authority under the provisions of the Orissa Merged States (Laws) Act, 1950, the sale is invalid. It was also contended in the plaint that the suit land being the joint property of the joint family. Champeswar and Duti had no right to sell.

(3.) ON these pleadings, the learned Munsif framed as many as 8 issues. The finding of the trial Court on issue No. 4 is that under the provisions of the Orissa Merged States ' (Laws) Act, permission was necessary for transfer between the parties as admittedly Champeswar and Dud belong to Scheduled Tribes and Defendant No. 1 belongs to non -Scheduled tribes. Since the transfer under Ext. A is invalid, Defendant No. 1 does not derive any interest there under. On issue No. 5, the conclusion of the learned Munsif is that the suit having been filed within twelve years of the said transaction is within time. On these conclusions, the learned Munsif decreed the suit and decreed recovery of possession also.