JANAKI KUER Vs. NIRMAL SAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by 2nd Additional Sub-ordinate Judge, Siwan in Title Appeal No. 5 of 1975/63 of 1985. The plaintiff of Title Suit No. 6 of 1965 is the appellant here. The appellant before this Court had lost in both the lower Courts. Hence this appeal.

(2.) Plaintiff's case in the lower Court was that there was one Sri Kishun Kanu who was married to Dhanwatia. Dhanwatia had a previous husband Ram Lakhan Sah of village Mohammadpur and she had a son named Ram Nagina Sah from her first husband. So, according to the plaintiff-appellant, Ram Nagina was not the son of Sri Kishun. Dhanwatia, however, gave birth to Sheojee Sah from her wedlock with Sri Kishun. Sri Kishun had his ownership and possession over Plot Nos. 1417,1317 and 318. Sri Kishun had fallen in debt and he had no money to repay the loan and so, he wanted to sell some portion of his land. The plaintiff, who is the wife of Sheojee, had some money in her possession given to her by her father. So, she purchased Plot Nos. 317 and 318 for a sum of Rs.200.00 (two hundred) by a registered deed dtd. 25/11/1942 and came in possession of those plots. After the death of Sri Kishun Sah, she constructed a new house over Plot No. 1417 and a portion of Plot No. 318. The house standing on Plot No. 318 was used by her for custody of household articles. Ram Nagina was in bad days and his son Bali Ram was living hither and thither. So, he requested the plaintiff to allow him to reside in the house over Plot No. 318.

(3.) In the year 1955, the plaintiff allowed Bali Ram and his family to live in her house standing over Plot No. 318. However, when the plaintiff demanded of the plaintiff-respondent to vocate the house in question, it was refused and, hence, the suit was filed for declaration of plaintiff's title and for recovery of possession.