BEJJUPURAM HAIMABATI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the plaintiff assails the affirming judgment passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge (FTC), Gunupur in R.F.A.No.10 of 2005.

(2.) Case of the plaintiff is that the suit land was recorded in the name of the defendants. One Sasibhusan Bebarta was in possession of the suit land since 1940. He constructed a thatched house over the same. After his death, his son Krishna Prasad Bebarta leased out that thatched house in favour of P. Nileeya, grandfather of the plaintiff, by means of a lease deed dated 14.1.1968 and delivered possession. P.Nileeya along with his daughter and son-in-law was residing in the suit house. He used to pay monthly rent to Krishna Prasad Bebarta. After death of P.Nileeya, his daughter, mother of the plaintiff, remained in possession of the suit house. After death of her mother, she is residing therein with his family members. She has acquired title by way of adverse possession. She has constructed a pucca house over the same. She used to pay holding tax to the N.A.C. The defendants have no semblance of right, title and interest over the same. While matter stood thus, the Tahasildar, Gunupur, defendant no.2 initiated an Encroachment Case no.136/83 against her. On 30.1.2004, defendant no.2 threatened her to vacate the same. With this factual scenario, she instituted the suit for declaration of title by way of adverse possession and permanent injunction.

(3.) Defendant no.2 entered contest and filed written statement pleading, inter alia, that the plaintiff has no semblance of right, title and interest over the suit house. She is not in continuous possession of the suit land. The suit land has been recorded in the Government khata. The plaintiff has illegally encroached upon the suit land for which encroachment case was initiated against her. Order of eviction was passed.