MOST. KHAGIA Vs. MOST. RAJMUKHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-VI, Hazaribagh, whereby learned Lower Appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the Plaintiffs/Appellants/Respondents.

(2.) The Plaintiffs had filed Title Suit No. 22 of 1979, seeking relief for declaration that the survey entry in respect of the suit land, described in Schedule-A, in the names of the Defendants, is erroneous and that the right, title and possession of the Plaintiffs in respect of the suit land be confirmed and if the Plaintiffs are found dispossessed from any portion of the suit land, the possession be recovered, evicting the Defendants from the suit land.

(3.) The Plaintiff case was that the land appertaining to Old khata No. 54, Plot No. 2073, area 7.69 acres of village Chuglamo, P.S. Barkatha, district Hazaribagh was Bakast land of ex-landlord of Ramgarh Estate. By virtue of settlement dated 26th November, 1943 and Furd Report of Amin dated 12th February, 1943, the ex-landlord had settled an area of 4.40 acres of the said Plot No. 2037 along with other land in favour of Khublal Choudhary, father of Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 4 and husband of Plaintiff No. 5. Since thereafter, the Plaintiffs had been in continuous peaceful possession of the land. After vesting of the estate, the predecessor-in-interest of the Plaintiffs was recognized as raiyat in respect of the said land and the rent receipts were granted to him. In the revisional survey, nine new plots, out of plot No. 2073, were carved out. New Plot Nos. 4011, 4012, 4013 and 4015 and new Khata No. 31 are recorded in the names of the Plaintiffs'. However, there was some error in respect of the actual area of Plot No. 4011.12 decimals of the Plaintiffs' land of new Plot No. 4011 has been wrongly recorded in the name of the Defendant. Taking undue advantage of the said erroneous entry, the Defendants started claiming their right over the suit land. The dispute led to a proceeding under Section 107, Code of Criminal Procedure. The Defendants' claim is wholly baseless. They have absolutely got no right, title, interest and possession over the suit, described in Schedule-A.