LAKSHMAN PRASAD Vs. RAM DARSHAN MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff -appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, F.T.C.IV, Motihari in Title Appeal No.23 of 1994/25 of 2007 by which the judgment and decree dated 24.02.1994 and 9.03.1994 respectively passed by the learned Sub - Judge -I, Motihari in Title Suit No.1 of 1987 have been set aside and the case has been remanded to the learned Sub -Judge to pass fresh judgment and decree after impleading Government Authorities in the suit, who has issued Purcha in favour of defendant nos. 6 & 8 (respondent nos. 1 and 3) and also to frame and decide the issue of adverse possession claimed by the defendant no.7 (respondent no.2).

(2.) THE plaintiff -appellant filed Title Suit No.1 of 1987 in the court of Sub -Judge for declaration that the suit land belongs to the plaintiff and he is in possession by virtue of purchase from the lawful title holder, who had been in possession of the same and for further declaration that the defendants had no title over the suit land and consequently, they were incompetent to disturb the possession of the plaintiff over the same. Further relief, i.e. in case the plaintiff is found dispossessed from any part of the suit land, then the decree for recovery of possession of the same may also be passed, was also sought for. The Purcha issued in favour of defendant nos. 6 to 8 are fraudulent and not binding on the plaintiff as they were issued behind his back.

(3.) ON the basis of pleadings of both the parties, seven issues were framed by the learned Sub -Judge. In support of his case, the plaintiff has examined 44 witnesses. The defendants have also examined 41 witnesses.