ANJALI DEBI THAPA Vs. SANDHYA DEBI THAPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these Second Appeals filed by the same appellants and directed against the same judgment and decree dated 17-1-2000 passed by the Ld. District Judge, West Tripura in Title Appeal No. 31 of 1998 are heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) The materials facts relevant for disposal of the appeals may be briefly stated. The plaintiff respondent (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent"), namely, Smt. Sandhya Devi Thapa filed title Suit No. 38/ 95 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Court No.2, Agartala for a declaration that the suit land (described in Schedule 'A{3)' to the plaint) was given to her as her share by way of a family arrangement with effect from 1985 and also for mandatory injunction directing the defendant-appellants (hereinafter called "the appellants") to remove the structure standing on the suit land. It is the case of the respondent that she is the daughter of Smt. Janaki Debi Thapa, the original Defendant No. 1 and the elder sister of the appellants herein. The predecessor-in-interest of the appellants and the respondent died on 18-9-1971 leaving them behind him. The appellants and the respondent inherited the properties described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint. It Is the further case of the respondent that in the year 1975 the appellants sold the land described in Schedule-A(I) to the plaint in favour of her husband, namely Dal Bahadur Thapa by means of a registered sale deed for a consideration. The respondent's husband thereafter got the said land mutated in his name and constructed a house thereon. It is the case of the respondent that in the year 1984, the appellants and the respondent Jointly sold another plot of land described in Schedule -'A'(2) to the plaint to one Uma Dutta by the registered sale deed dated 16-10-1984. According to the respondent, the remaining land of Schedule 'A' to the plaint was then partitioned amongst them by family arrangement, for which a sketch map was drawn indicating their respective shares therein. It is the case of the respondent that the suit land was given to her pursuant to the said family arrangement. It is also averred by the respondent that the appellants sold some land described in Schedule - 'A'(4) to the plaint to one Sabita Saha by the registered sale deed dated 7-2-1987. According to the respondent in terms of the said family arrangement, the appellants agreed to remove a portion of the house standing on the suit land under their occupation as and when she required them. But in December, 1994 when she asked them to quit the suit land and remove the said house standing thereon, the appellants refused to do so. Hence, she had to institute the suit.

(3.) The appellants resisted the suit and filed their written statement submitting inter alia therein that there was no cause of action; the suit was barred by limitation. According to the appellants, in the year 1975, the land described in Schedule 'A'(1) was not actually sold by them. On the contrary, it is contended by the appellants, since the respondent's husband, a retired army personnel, was getting loan facilities for house building and as proposed by the respondent, the land in Schedule A(1) was transferred to her husband by family arrangement by executing the registered sale deed dated 11-12-1975. It is asserted by the appellants that apart from the aforesaid land, the respondent has no other share in the remaining portion of the land described in Schedule 'A' and as such the suit is liable, to be dismissed.