MAHABIR TURUNDU Vs. NAGE MUNDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE defendants are the appellants and this appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 8.8.1979 and 18.8.1979 passed by the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Cumla, in Title Suit No. 105 of 1977 decreeing the suit for declaration of title.

(3.) DEFENDANTS Mahabir Prasad and Sachhidanand Verma had contested the suit by filing their separate written statements but in sum and substance the contents of both the written statements are one and the same. The defendants have taken a plea in their written statements that the suit is barred by law of limitation and adverse possession and the same is also barred by principles of res judicata as an area of 20 Decimals out of the suit land was acquired by the State of Bihar for construction of Railway line in Land Acquisition Case No. 397/133 of 1964/66, wherein the plaintiffs predecessor in interest had claimed the compensation amount and the matter was referred to the District Judge under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act and the defendants' father was held to be entitled to receive the compensation amount with respect to the acquired land, which were acquired by Award dated 23.4.1966. As per the written statements, the further case of the defendants is that the Saikadar was paying Saikapaddy to the predecessor in interest of the defendants and the defendants' predecessor in interest were always realising the same from the persons named in Khata No. 165 and when they failed to pay Saikapaddy the defendants' predecessor in interest were compelled to file Rent Suit Case No. 375 R 8 of 1940 41, which was accordingly, decreed by the Rent Suit Deputy Collector, Gumla and the same was confirmed in appeal being Rent Appeal No. 14/1941 by the then Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi and the order was upheld to the stage of the High Court. For non payment of decretal amount to the defendant's predecessor in interest, the Execution Case No. 68 RG of 1946 47 was filed and on the failure of payment of decretal dues the lands were auction sold and the defendants predecessors in interest purchased the Saika night of the plaintiffs ancestors and got delivery of possession of the lands in question through the Court as far back on 16.12,1948 and they are still in possession having good and indefeasible title over the same and they are paying rent to the State of Bihar and prior to vesting to the ex landlord and the regular rent receipts were granted. It is the further case of the defendants that prior to the auction purchase the plaintiff's ancestors used to execute Kabuliat with respect to the lands and their possession in favour of the defendants predecessors in interest, and as such, they were always in permissive possession under the defendants' predecessors in interest. In has further been asserted by the defendants that in or about 1946 Lenga Munda had very clearly and categorically executed a document in favour of the defendants' father late Jagdishwar Prasad stating therein that he had not interest over the lands in suit as he had no claim over the same.