JAGANNATH BEHERA (DEAD) Vs. KHUSUNI BEHERA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff is the appellant against a confirming judgment in a suit for declaration of title over Schedule-A property and delivery of possession.

(2.) The following genealogy would show the relationship of the parties:

(3.) Ghana was the common ancestor of the parties. He had two sons, Tanu and Indramani. All are dead. Plaintiff is the son of Tanu. Indramani had two sons, Kamal Lochan- defendant no.1 and Kailash-defendant no.2. The case of the plaintiff was that his father Tanu had purchased Ac.0.05 dec. of land appertaining to hal khata no.88, plot nos. 281 & 282, Mouza Palasia, Ward No.8 of Karanjia N.A.C. (Schedule-B land) prior to 1931 settlement from one Rambha Dibya for a consideration of Rs.17/-. It was an oral sale. Possession was delivered to him. His father had constructed a house and residing therein. His father's name had been recorded in the last settlement. It was further stated that Ghana was a permanent resident of Village-Goudagaon. He had only Ac.0.42 dec. of land. The said land was not fertile. There was no surplus income from the joint family property. Schedule-B land was the self-acquired property of his father. Indramani, father of defendants 1 and 2 had approached his father to stay over Schedule-A land till construction of his house. His father permitted him to occupy a portion of Schedule-A land, which is a part of Schedule-B land. Indramani constructed a small house over the same and stayed with his family. In the year 1997, defendant no.1 got Schedule-A land demarcated in P.F.I. Case No.734/97. The defendants claimed that Schedule-A land fell to their share in the family partition in the year 1931. With this factual scenario, he instituted the suit seeking the reliefs mentioned supra.