MD YUNUS Vs. MOINUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of affirmance passed in Title Appeal No. 48 of 1985 by 1st Additional District Judge, Purnia.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for declaration and confirmation of right, title, interest and their khas possession over the suit land and also sought for declaration that R.S. Khatian of the suit land recording the name of late defendant - Mehar Ali and Dusadh Ali as sikmidars is wrong and incorrect. According to the plaintiffs one Sk. Sahadat son of Mazhar Ali purchased lands of C.S. khata no. 89 bearing C.S. plot nos. 1565, 1566, 1567, 1569 and 1572 comprising total area of 1 acre 54 decimals through registered sale deed dated 19.3.1943, and said Sk. Sahadat came in possession of the said land. Sk. Sahadat gave 25 decimals of land out of C.S. plot nos. 1565, 1566 and 1567 as sikmi settlement to one Sk. Biptu, father of original defendant no. 2-Sk. Dusadh Ali through a registered deed at yearly rent of Rs. 2/- payable to Sk. Sahadat and the rest suit land remained in khas possession of Sk. Sahadat. Plaintiff-Abdul Rahman purchased the entire suit land of Schedule I & Schedule II of the plaint from Sk. Sahadat through a registered sale deed executed on 19.3.1953 and after purchase the plaintiff came in khas possession of the land mentioned in Schedule-I and through sikmi tenant over the lands of Schedule II of the plaint. Plaintiffs claimed that R.S. plot nos. 2361, 2364, 2359, 2360, 2361/2690 have been carved out from the purchased lands of the plaintiffs and the same are subject matter of the present suit. R.S. plot nos. 2361 and 2364 of Schedule I of the plaint has been recorded as kaimi land in the name of the plaintiffs, but wrong sikmi entry has been made in the name of Mehar Ali and Dusadh Ali.

(3.) Defendants 1 to 6 are legal heirs of original defendant no. 1 Mehar Ali and Dusadh Ali, but, these defendants have not contested the suit after filing of the written statement. Defendant no. 7 and defendant no. 8 have contested the suit by filing written statement and adducing evidence denying the claim of the plaintiffs and according to them R.S. Plot nos. 2361 and 2364 described in Schedule I of the plaint were in sikmi possession of Mehar Ali and Dusadh Ali since long and they have been recorded in sikmi possession in revisional record of rights. It is stated that Mehar Ali while in possession of the said plot sold his eight annas interest in the sikmi land in favour of Dusadh Ali through registered sale deed dated 2.12.1959 and thereafter Dusadh Ali became 16 annas owner of the sikmi land, and, further, it is stated that Dusadh Ali while in possession sold it to the contesting defendants for a consideration of Rs. 2,000/- through a registered sale deed dated 10.6.1972 and since then they claimed to be in possession over the suit land. According to them, the revisional survey record of rights of the suit land has been correctly prepared by the survey authority after proper verification and spot enquiry. Further it is stated that there is a custom in the suit village regarding sale of sikmi land.