MADHAB CHANDRA MANDAL Vs. TILOTTAMA DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiffs sued for a declaration of their title and confirmation of possession and for a declaration that a certain entry in the record of rights was incorrect.

(2.) This entry in the record of rights refers to Dags Nos. 1053 and 1057. In the record-of- rights these dags are recorded as being held by the Gramya Thakurani through the shebait Madhab Chandra Mandal as a tenant under plaintiff 3 rent-free. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the widows and plaintiff 3 is the daughter of one Birkishore Manna. Their case was that the dags in dispute were in their khas possession. The case of the defence was that the lands in suit never belonged to the plaintiffs alleged landlords and were never included in the plaintiffs jote but that they belonged to the idols Sitala, Kali and Mahainaya who were the village goddesses of Mauza Golabari, that the plaintiffs were never in possession of the same but that defendant 2 possessed them on behalf of the deities as a shebait. Further that the suit was barred by limitation.

(3.) The trial Court found that the plaintiffs had title to the lands as claimed by them but held that the suit lands were held by the deity as a tenant under the plaintiffs without payment of any rent. On these findings the trial Court dismissed the plaintiffs claim for confirmation of khas possession or recovery of khas possession.