PRAYAG LAL MAHATO Vs. GUDDU SAW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.N. Das, assisted by Mr. Ramchander Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) The appellants have preferred this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2015 and 04.01.2016 respectively passed in Title Appeal No.160 of 2006 by the District Judge-VI, Dhanbad who has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 07.09.2006 and 25.09.2006 respectively passed in Title Suit No.156 of 2004 by the learned Munsif-II, Dhanbad.

(3.) The appellants/plaintiffs instituted the suit seeking a decree of declaration that appellants/plaintiffs have got valid right, title and interest over 72 decimal of land appertaining to Plot No.327 under Khata No.44, Mouza No.91, Mouza Nohatamurcha, P.S. Tundi as mentioned in Schedule-A and further sale deed no.4734 dated 02.07.2004 executed by Adiya Mahatain in favour of Guddu Saw and Giri Saw with respect to 70 decimals in plot no.320, 327 and 322 under Khata No.54, Mouza 91 be declared as null and void. It was further case of the appellants/plaintiffs that the lands under Khata No.44, Plot Nos.175, 320, 327 and 322 total area 3.08 acres of [2] mouza Nohatamurcha, P.S. Tundi originally belonged to Raghu Teli son of Kali Charan Teli who sold and transferred 1.54 acres of the above land to Muchiram Teli on 04.09.1943 by sale deed no.8834 and put him in possession. Muchiram Teli sold and transferred the same of his two daughters namely Rudhi Mahatain and Adia Mahatain on 12.03.1970 by sale deed no.4720 and put them in possession over the same thereafter 72 decimals of land in Plot No.327 to Akli Mahatain wife of Balram Mahato on 22.09.1976 for valuable consideration and put her in possession over the same. Akli Mahatain was mother of plaintiffs and her purchased land was mentioned as Schedule-A in the plaint which was inherited by appellants/plaintiffs after her death. Appellants/Plaintiffs came to know on 06.07.2004 that Adiya Mahatain had wrongly sold and transferred 70 decimals of land in all the plots purchased by her father in the year 1943 including the land in Plot No.327 and executed sale deed no.4734 dated 02.07.2004 in favour of Guddu Saw and Giri Saw for a consideration of Rs.32,000/-. Adi Mahatain had no right to transfer as she along with her sisters Radhi Mahatain had sold and transferred 72 decimals of land in Plot No.327 to Akli Mahatain, the deceased mother of appellants/plaintiffs in the year 1976 through sale deed no.9257 sale deed no.4734 dated 02.07.2004 was not binding upon the appellants/plaintiffs. Further case of the appellants/plaintiffs was that the Title (Partition) Suit No.83 of 1986 was filed by the appellants/plaintiffs but the land of Muchiram Teli situated at different places could not be partitioned because no final decree was prepared.