LAL MOHAN SUTRADHAR Vs. NIRODA SUNDARI MAJUMDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>A.B.PAL, J.</DJG> This second appeal impugning the judgment and decree dated 22.6.94 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Belonia, South Tripura in T.A. No. 1 of 93 has its origin in a dispute over correct identification of suit land between the contending parties, a factual dispute fuelled by legal intricacies and thus given a long run since 1984 when the Title suit was filed with the battle remaining unabated till now calling upon this court to give finality.

(2.) The respondents herein are Smt. Nirada Sundari Majumder and others who are the legal heirs of late Dhirendra Kumar Majumder who filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit land. It is the case of the plaintiff respondents that Dhirendra Kumar Majumder became the owner of the suit land by registered kabuliat covering lands measuring 5 kanis with specific bound- aries. The said land appertained to jote No. 329. On the southern side of the said land, jote Nos. 307 and 158 were created in the name of Akshay Kumar Shilsharma and Kara Charan Shilsharma. Later, Hara Charan Shilsharma sold his jote lands of jote No. 158 to Maharani Shilsharma who again transferred the same to defendant No. 12. The lands of jote No. 307 of Akshay Kumar Shilsharma situated on the adjacent northern side of jote No. 158 were sold to other defendants. The plaintiff-respondent claimed that in the registered kabuliat of Akshay Kumar Shilsharma, plot No. 2795 was wrongly mentioned. The lands owned and possessed by him appertain to plot No. 2794. However, though Dhirendra Kumar Majumder became the owner of the suit land by registered kabuliat dated 25.7.56 situated on the adjacent northern side of jote No. 307 and possessed the same by constructing selling huts thereon, the de - fendant-appellants dispossessed his legal heirs, the respondents herein, on 9.5.78 giving rise to the age long legal battle. This wrong recording of the suit lands in the record of rights of the contending parties came to notice of the plaintiff-respondents from khatian No. 759 of Akshay Kumar Shilsharma which contained plot No. 1646 showing the lands of the plaintiff-respondent appertaining thereto. Khatian 779 in the name of Dhirendra Kumar Majumder recorded plot Nos. 1645 and 1646/2628. After knowing about this wrong entries which provided the opportunity or excuse to the defendant-appellant to dispossess the original owners, the plaintiff-respondents after a failed attempt for correction of the record of rights in Revenue forum instituted T.S. No. 1/81 in the court of Sub Judge, Udaipur, Sourth Tripura which was dismissed for insufficient Court fees. Thereafter they filed the present suit for. declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit lands measuring 4 kanis 13 gandas wrongly recorded in the khatain No. 759 appertaining to plot No. 1646.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant appellant contending, inter alia, that Dhirendra" Kumar Majumder did never possess the suit lands appertaining to plot: No. 1646 of Khatian No. 759 and there was no wrong entry into the record of rights. According to him, their predecessor Akshay Kumar Shilsarma became the owner of 5 kanis of land by akabuliat dated 13.2.56 and the said lands appertain to plot No. 2795. He also possesses the northern portion of plot No. 2794 which was a banren land. Further contention of the defendant appellant is that northern portion of plot No. 2794 was a khas land and the same was allotted to the legal heirs of Akshay Kumar Shilsharma. After allotment, the said land was sold to the defendant No. 13 and since purchase the said defendant had been in possession of the suit lands.