RAGHUNATH JENA Vs. ADKIKANDA PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree passed by Learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Jajpur in T.A. No. 30 of 2000 confirming the Judgment and decree of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jajpur in T.S. No. 214 of 1998.

(2.) THE Respondent as Plaintiff filed the title suit for declaration of his right title over the suit land, recovery of possession of the same after evicting the Defendants there from and also for a declaration that the Orders Dated 18.6.1987 passed by the Tahasildar, Jajpur in OLR Case Nos. 21 and 22 of 1980 are illegal and not binding on the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's case in brief was that total area of Ac. No. 1 1.56 decimals appertaining to Plot Nos. 38, 41, 37 and 40 in Mouza -Bepari Berhampur in Jajpur Town belonged to Rama Krushna Sen, Purna Chandra Sen and Nani Gopal Sen, who were intermediaries in Khas possession. After vesting of these lands in the State as per the provision of Orissa Estates Abolition Act (in short, 'the Act'), these intermediaries applied for settlement of the above said lands under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act and the lands were settled in their favour. Out of these lands, Nani Gopal sold eastern 1/3rd share to one Kulamani Behera, whereas Rama Krushna and Purna Chandra sold the remaining 2/3rd share measuring Ac.0.76 decimals and some odd to the Plaintiff under two registered sale deeds dated 9.5.1979 and 11.4.1979 and put the Plaintiff in possession'. The Plaintiff thereafter got the lands mutated in his name and paid rent. There were fruit bearing trees on the suit land, so the Plaintiff fenced the land and constructed a watchman house and engaged Defendant No. 1 as watchman. The other Defendants, who are also family members of Defendant No. 1 joined Defendant No. 1 and filed OLR Case Nos. 21 and 22 of 1980 under Section 9 of the OLR Act claiming possession over that house, but the Tahasildar rejected their claim. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 then preferred OLR appeal Nos. 40 and 41 of 1983 before the S.D.O., Jajpur, who remanded the matter for fresh enquiry and orders. The Tahasildar after enquiry settled the suit land in favour of the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 9(1) of the OLR Act. The Plaintiff preferred appeal against that order of settlement, but there was no appeal provision and therefore, did not press that appeal. Defendants thereafter created trouble over the suit land. So, the Plaintiff filed the suit seeking the aforementioned relief.

(3.) LEARNED Civil Judge framed 8 issues and accepted oral and documentary evidence of the parties. On consideration of these evidences, he came to the conclusion that the suit is not barred by limitation or Section 67 of the OLR Act, that the Plaintiff has acquired right, title and interest over the suit land and that the Defendants are in illegal occupation of that lands. He accordingly, decreed the suit. The Defendants carried appeal, but their appeal was dismissed and hence, the present appeal.