DHOBA BEHERA Vs. HADU BEHERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is the appellant against a confirming judgment in a suit for partition.

(2.) Case of the plaintiff was that he and defendant no.1 are brothers. There was a partition of the ancestral properties between them. Subsequently they jointly acquired the suit land from one Sitaram Agrawalla in the year 1961 by means of a registered sale deed and took delivery of possession. As per mutual understanding and convenience, he was in possession of southern half of the suit land, whereas defendant no.1 was in possession of northern portion of the suit land. Since there was no complete partition by metes and bounds between them, the suit land was recorded jointly in their names in the major settlement. Defendant no.1 transferred the entire suit land in favour of defendant no. The plaintiff asked defendant no.2 to make partition of the suit land. But then, defendant no.2 claimed the entire suit land. He has half share over the suit land.

(3.) Defendant no.2 filed a written statement along with counter claim. Case of the defendant no.2 was that there was partition of the properties between defendant no.1 and the plaintiff. The suit land fell to the share of defendant no.1. The plaintiff did not raise any objection in the mutation case. The suit land was mutated in the name of the defendant no.1. Thereafter, defendant no.1 transferred the suit land in favour of defendant no.2 by means of a registered sale deed dated 19.1988 and delivered possession. He has acquired title and possession over the suit land. Defendant no.1 was set ex parte.