GINI KUI AND Vs. ROBINSON ZURINDAL DUBRAJ TIEU,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Plaintiffs' second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21st May, 2005 passed in Title Appeal No. 1 of 2004. By the impugned judgment the appeal filed by the Defendants has been allowed and the judgment and decree of the Trial Court passed in favour of the Plaintiffs has been set aside.

(2.) THE Plaintiffs filed Title Suit No. 1 of 2001 in the court of Munsif at Chaibasa, praying therein for a decree of declaration of their right title and interest over the suit property and for declaring that the record of right published in the year 1964 in respect of the suit land is wrong. The Plaintiffs further prayed for a decree of confirmation of possession over the suit land and permanent injunction, restraining the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from going over the suit land and from interfering with the Plaintiffs' possession.

(3.) THE Defendants contested the claim of the Plaintiffs. Defendants' case was that in the year 1946, fathers of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 jointly purchased the suit property by virtue of registered sale deed dated 22nd March, 1946 for a valuable consideration. They came in possession of the suit land and got their names mutated in the revenue records without any objection from the Plaintiffs' father. They constructed their house over the suit land, Subsequently, the Plaintiffs' father, who was the friend, was allowed to reside in the house as a licensee. The remaining portion of the house was retained by the Defendants for their residential use. The Defendants denied the ' Plaintiffs' claim of the alleged gift in respect of the suit property. Further case of the Defendants was that in 'HO' community, the married daughters are not entitled to inherit the properties of their father, They, being the tribal, cannot transfer the property without prior permission of the Deputy Commissioner under the provisions of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act. The Plaintiffs have' no right title over the suit land. When they stacked stone and other materials for the purpose of further construction in the suit land, the Plaintiffs raised objection for the first time. The matter was reported to village Munda. The Panchayat was convened by Munda and in the Panchayati the claim of the Defendants was upheld. According to the Defendants, the original sale deed was all along in possession of the Defendant No. 1, but once it was given to the husband of the Plaintiff No. 2, who is an advocate. Defendants' further case was that after the death of the parents of the Plaintiffs, they permitted for burial of the dead body in a portion of the land, as the father of the Plaintiffs was a close friend of the fathers of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. Besides the same, the Defendants have taken other legal pleas challenging the maintainability of the Plaintiffs' suit.