PRADIP SINGHA ROY Vs. DEBIKA SINGHA CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR reasons not intelligible, the same appellants have preferred above (2) appeals against same judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court recording concurrent findings and, therefore, it is proposed to dispose of them by this common judgment.

(2.) ASISH Kumar Singha and Sudhansu Bikas Singha Roy were close neighbours. Asish instituted Title Suit No. 80/1988 in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 2, Agartala, West Tripura against Sudhansu seeking declaration of title, confirmation of possession and perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, disturbing in any way his peaceful possession in certain lands appertaining to C. S. plot No. 4927 of Khatian No. 1874 under Mouza Agartala, Sheet No. 6. The disputed land belonging to that plot is a narrow passage measuring 24 ft. in length from north to south and 3 ft. in breadth from east to west. Sudhansu, the neighbour and defendant, not only in his defence put up a hostile claim to the said passage, but preferred to institute Title Suit No. 98/1990, about 2 years after Ashis filed his suit, in the same court seeking declaration of his title and recovery of possession of the passage showing its length 70ft. from north to south and breadth 5 ft. from east to west, claiming that the same appertained to his lands of C. S. plot No. 4929 and 4930 of Khatian No. 1875. Ashis having no claim over lands of C. S. plot No. 4929 and 4930 and Sudhnsu also having no claim over the lands of C. S. plot No. 4926 and 4927, the dispute to be resolved by the court was wheher the said patch of lands appertained to the lands of plot Nos. 4926 and 4927 of Ashis or plot Nos. 4929 and 4930 of Sudhansu. During the pendency of the above two suits, both Ashis and Sudhansu died leaving behind their legal heirs to continue the long drawn battle.

(3.) THE short fact, which is not in dispute, is that on the death of one Purna Sashi Singha, her only son Ashis Kr. Singha and her five daughters inherited certain lands measuring 8 gandas 2 karas 1 kranta and 11 dhurs appertaining to C. S. Plot Nos. 4926 and 4927 of Khatian No. 1874 under Mouja Agartala, sheet No. 6 and they were confortably in possession of the same. The disputed patch of land lying on the western boundary of the said lands was vacant. On the further west Sudhansu had a small passage and a 'dokanbhiti' on his lands of plot Nos. 4929 and 4930, who at the relevant time alleged to have tried to encroach the vacant passage of Ashis by extending the 'dockanbhiti', thus giving rise to the proceeding instituted by Ashis and his unmarried sister. It is the definite case of Sudhansu, as pleaded in his written statement in the suit filed by Ashis and in the plaint of the suit filed by him (registered as T. S. No. 98/1990) that after the death of his father Ram Lal Roy, the properties left by him were partitioned amicably among his sons, two of whom, Sudhansu and Amarendra, got in their share 14 gandas of lands which were recorded in C. S. Plot Nos. 4935, 4936, 4929 and 4930 of Khatian No. 1875. The lands of plot Nos. 4929 and 4930 of Sudhansu and Amarendra were adjacent to lands of plot Nos. 4926 and 4927 of Ashis and his sisters. It was contended in his suit by Sudhansu that in 1985 Ashis dispossessed him from the disputed land measuring 70 ft. in length and 5 ft. in breadth and, therefore, he prayed for recovery of possession of the said lands by evicting Ashis therefrom.