PRASAD KUMAR NAIK Vs. PARBATI NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the defendant.

(2.) Plaintiff-respondent instituted the suit for declaration of right, title and interest or in the alternative for partition of the suit land. The case of the plaintiff was that the suit land originally belonged to one Ghuman. He had four sons, namely, Goutam, Hari, Bansi and Ashok. In a family partition, the suit land fell to the share of Goutam. He was in possession of the same. Niladri was the wife of Goutam. Prasad, defendant, was the son of Ashok. Goutam had a daughter, namely, Dhubuni. She predeceased her parents. Parbati, plaintiff, is the daughter of Dhubuni and grand-daughter of Goutam and Niladri. Goutam died about 20 years back leaving behind him widow, Niladri, who possessed the suit land. Niladri died on 1.11.76 leaving behind the plaintiff as her only heir. The plaintiff was in possession of the suit land. The defendant managed to get his name recorded in the current settlement R.O.R. He falsely claimed to be the adopted son of Goutam. He is not the adopted son of Goutam and Niladri. With this factual scenario, she instituted the suit seeking the reliefs mentioned supra.

(3.) The defendant entered contest and filed a written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint. The specific case of the defendant was that the plaintiff was a stranger to the family of Goutam. Goutam and Niladri adopted the defendant in October, 1935, when he was a child. Since the date of adoption, he had been treated as the son of Goutam. He had performed the obsequies of Goutam and Niladri. It was further pleaded that Goutam executed a registered deed of acknowledgement of adoption in his favour on 21.6.1951. He disputed the dates of death of Goutam and Niladri. According to him, Goutam died on 10.1.55. Niladri died in October, 1974. After the death of Goutam and before the Hindu Succession Act came into force, he succeeded to the suit property and is in possession of the same.