MUKUNDA DHAL @ MUKUNDAGARAG DHAL Vs. SRI BHAGABAT GOSWAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants of T.S No. 11 of 1975 of the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Dhenkanal have filed this Second Appeal assailing the Judgment and decree passed in the said suit which was confirmed by the Learned District Judge, Dhenkanal in T.A No. 21 of 1982.

(2.) BEREFT of unnecessary details the short facts which are necessary for effectual adjudication are stated here -in -below: Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 filed T.S No. 11 of 1975 with a prayer for declaration of their right, title & interest over the lands more -f ully described in the suit schedule & for confirmation of possession & in the alternative, recovery of possession. According to the plaint case, they were the marfatdars of the deity Sri Bhagabat Goswain of village: Nihalprasad, P.S: Gondia in the district of Dhenkanal & their grandfather endowed a piece of land measuring an area of Ac.0.03 decimals appertaining to Plot No. 879 in favour of the deity. It is averred that originally their grandfather had built a thatched house over the suit land & installed the deity. The same was however, gutted down in the year 1904. Thereafter their father Pravakar Dhal, sometime in the year 1920 constructed a two roomed pucca house towards western side of the suit land & kept the eastern side vacant. In the Revisional Settlement records published in the year 1923 -24 the suit land was recorded jointly in the name of the father of proforma Defendants along with the father of the Plaintiffs. Taking advantage of such recording Defendant Nos. 1 to 8, it was alleged advanced a false claim over the suit land during settlement operation & forcibly extended their Cowshed towards the vacant Rortion of the suit land in December, 1973 & also locked the waiting room. Having no other option the suit was filed.

(3.) ON the basis of the pleadings the Trial Court framed as many as nine issues. In support of their case the Plaintiffs got five witnesses examined and exhibited four documents whereas the Defendants got three witnesses examined and exhibited four documents including the certified copy of the final decree proceeding arising out of T.S No. 10 of 1961 of the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Dhenkanal which was marked as Ext.A. The Trial Court after discussing the evidence in extensp decreed the suit. Being aggrieved the Defendants filed an appeal in the Court of the Learned District Judge, Dhenkanal which was registered as T.A No. 21 of 1982. The lower Appellate Court also dismissed the appeal. The aforesaid Judgments as stated eariier are assailed in this Second Appeal.