SURENDRA KUMAR PAUL Vs. PRAMILA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the appellants Judgment and decree dated 27.5.1986 passed in Title Appeal No. 31 of 19.9.84 by the Additional District Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar confirming the Trial Court Judgment and Decree dated 31.7.1984 passed by the Munisiff, Kailashahar, North Tripura in Title Suit No. 2 of 1983 dismissing the suit.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs is simple. The siix plaintiffs became the owner of the 'A' scheduled land as gifted by their father under a registered Gift Deed dated 5.4.1979. The plaintiffs case was that the defendant was permitted to reside in the suit land i.e. 'B' scheduled land which is a portion of 'A' scheduled land as a licence but she did not vacate the same when she was told. Hence the plaintiffs filed the suit for title and eviction. The defendant in her written statement contested the suit stating that she acquired title over the suit land ('B' scheduled of the Plaint) as the same was gifted orally by the original ownar i.e. the father of the plaintiffs. It was also the case of the defendant that she (defendant) was married to the father of the plaintiffs and from their wedlock a child was born and she had been living in the suit land as owner thereof. The learned Trial Court dismissed the suit, interalia, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove the execution of the registered gift deed lated 5.4.79 and that the defendant proved that she was the lawfully married wife of the plaintiffs' father i.e. Suresh Ch. Paul. On appeal the learned Appellate Court confirmed the decree passed by the Trial Court. Hence the present Second Appeal by the plaintiffs.

(3.) The substantial question of law formulated at the time of admission of this appeal is :