KUTURI DEI Vs. SUKA DEI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and order dated August, 22 1990 passed by the Commissioner of Consolidation, Sambalpur at Bhubaneswar in Consolidation Revision No. 1721 of 1983 (Annexure -7) the writ petitioner has filed this writ application.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is briefly stated below : Plot. No. 2072 in Khata No. 287 of Mouza -Bania, P.S. Bhadrak, District -Balasore having an area of Ac.0.74 decimals (hereinafter referred to as the 'disputed property') was originally recorded in the name of Ranka Jena, the husband of the writ petitioner and Ajodhya Bewa, w/o. Gadei Jena with sthitiban status in the record of rights of 1928. Ajodhya Bewa died issueless and thereafter Ranka Jena became exclusive owner of the disputed land. Ranka paid rent to the ex -intermediary regularly and obtained receipts. As Ranka was a tenant under the intermediary on the date of vesting under the Orissa Estates Abolition Act hereinafter referred to as 'O.E.A.Act'), he became a direct tenant under the State and continued to pay rent to the State. Ranka died leaving behind the writ petitioner as his widow and a minor son named Abhiram Jena. One Kalandi Parida, the predecessor -in -interest of the opp. parties 1 to 6 was cultivating the disputed land as a bhag tenant. Rent was being paid by the writ petitioner through Kalandi. Taking advantage of the petitioner's simplicity and innocence Kalandi managed to obtain some receipts from the Revenue Inspector in his own name. In 1978 the petitioner received a notice from the Revenue Supervisor, Bhadrak asking her to clear up the arrear rent in respect of the disputed land by January 30, 1978. On receipt of such notice the petitioner cleared up the arrear rents and thereafter continued to pay rent regularly. By order dated December 23, 1981 passed in O.L.R Case No. 4/174 of 1980 the Revenue Officer -cwm -Tahasildar, Bhadrak converted the rent in kind into cash rent. Petitioner was also issued a Rent Schedule accordingly. Although settlement operation started in the area, but before its completion the area was brought under consolidation operation. Before the consolidation authority Kalandi Parida objected to the petitioner's claim for recording the disputed land in her name. Objection case being No. 1169/180 was started by Consolidation Officer, Bhadrak. During pendency of that consolidation objection case Kalandi died leaving the opp. parties as his legal heirs. In the objection the opp. parties 1 to 6 as his legal alleged that ex -intermediary Mritunjaya Narayan Praharaj resumed the disputed land from Ranka, got back possession and thereafter inducted Kalandi as a tenant on bhag basis.

(3.) THUS the moot question is who was the tenant of the disputed land under the ex -intermediary on the eve of vesting under the O.E.A. Act.