R.K. SANAJAOBA SINGH Vs. SORENSANGBAM ENJIBALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three second appeals arise out of the common judgment dtd. 31/5/2017 of the learned District Judge, Imphal West, in First Civil Appeal Nos. 23 and 24 of 2016. Thereby, the learned District Judge reversed the common judgment dtd. 18/8/2016 of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Imphal West, in Original Suit No.21 of 2011/46/12 and Original Suit No.28 of 2011/44/12/415/13.

(2.) Original Suit No.21 of 2011 was filed by Sorensangbam Enjibala Devi against R.K.Sanajaoba Singh seeking a declaration that she was the owner of the suit-land by virtue of the sale deed dtd. 26/7/2010 (Ex.A3/Ex.B4) executed in her favour by R.K.Sanajaoba Singh, which was registered by the office of the Sub-Registrar, Porompat. In the alternative, if no title had passed to her under the said registered sale deed due to lack of territorial jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrar, Porompat, she sought a declaration that R.K.Sanajaoba Singh had sold the suit-land to her by executing the sale deed on 26/7/2010 and to direct the Sub-Registrar, Wangoi, Imphal West District, to register the sale deed. In consequence, she sought eviction of R.K.Sanajaoba Singh from the suit-land by demolition of the structures standing thereon and for delivery of the suit-land to her. Lastly, she sought a perpetual injunction, restraining R.K.Sanajaoba Singh and his men from entering into the suit-land, and the costs of the litigation. The suit-land comprised the homestead measuring an area of 0.17 acre covered by C.S.Dag No.536 /877 under Patta No.383/729 of Revenue Village No.68-Naorem Leikai, Imphal West District, of which a portion measuring 0.025 acre had been acquired by the State Government for widening National Highway No.39.

(3.) Original Suit No.28 of 2011 was filed by R.K.Sanajaoba Singh against Sorensangbam Enjibala Devi seeking a declaration that the sale deed bearing Document No.1347(V) of 2010 dtd. 30/7/2010 (Ex.A3/Ex.B4) of the Sub-Registrar, Porompat, Imphal East District, was null, void and non-est in the eye of law. Further, he sought a declaration that the illegal mutation of the name of Sorensangbam Enjibala Devi in respect of the suit-land was void and sought a consequential direction to restore his name in respect thereof. He also sought costs. Trite to state, the suit-land in O.S. No.28 of 2011 was the same as the suit-land in O.S. No.21 of 2011. R.K.Sanajaoba Singh also raised a counter-claim in O.S. No 21 of 2011 seeking certain reliefs, which shall be referred to in detail hereinafter.