MD.ZAIMUDDIN @ MD.AZIM Vs. SK.MANGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellants and Defendants.

(2.) The case of the Plaintiffs in the plaint is that one Sk. Bhutto was the original owner of 6 Khatas 18 Dhurs of Plot Nos. 2466, 2467 and 2468 whose name duly recorded in cadestral khatian finally prepared and published in the year 1905-07 and Sk. Bhutto died leaving behind his two sons namely, Sk. Tahir and Sk. Zahir who inherent (sic- inherited ?) and came in joint possession and their names recorded in the sirista of the ex-landlord who submitted jamindari return in their names at the time of vesting of jamindari in the State of Bihar and the State of Bihar prepared register two in the names and also issued rent receipts in their names on payment of rent. Further case of the Plaintiff Sk. Tahir orally sold 1 decimal of land out of said 6 Khatas 18 Dhurs to one Sk. Najo in the year 1965 and possession was duly delivered and during the course of revisional survey out of three Plots new plot No. 2361 area 0.14 acre and new khata No. 1154 have been carved out but the revisional survey khatian of the new plots has been recorded jointly in the name of Sk. Tahir and Sk. Zahir, sons of Sk. Bhutto to the extent of three annas and Sk. Fakko and Sk. Najjo, sons of Sk. Alijan without mentioning any share. However, after recording the names of Sk. Najjo and Sk. Fakko trouble started between the parties and to avoid trouble Sk. Tahir executed a registered kebala with regard to 1 dhur of the land in the year 1979 described in Schedule-B of the plaint and further the case of the Plaintiffs is that they are coming in peaceful possession of remaining 0.15 acre of land and new plot No. 2355 of Khata No. 1154 which is the suit land and fully described in Schedule 'A' of the plaint which is subject matter of the suit.

(3.) The further case of the Plaintiffs is that when they wanted to put brick wall upto about 6 feets in height in place of their mud wall upon the suit land which was stopped through proceeding under Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure and the claim of the Plaintiffs that they have got perfect right, title, interest and possession over Schedule 'A' land and the Defendant has not right over the same.