SAWNA MUNDA Vs. LAGNU MUNDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been preferred against the Judgement dated 31st March, 2015 (decree sealed and signed on 13.04.2015), passed by Learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-I, Ranchi in Title Appeal No. 46 of 2010, whereby Judgment dated 26th February, 2010 (decree sealed and signed on 12.03.2010), passed by learned Sub-ordinate Judge-I, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 209 of 2007 has been upheld and the appeal stood dismissed.

(2.) Plaintiff is appellant and suit was brought by him for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land. In nutshell case of the plaintiff-appellant is that the plaintiff and defendant No.1 are related to each other to this effect genealogical table is given by the plaintiff in which Jagarnath Munda and Baijnath Munda are shown to be real brothers and both are sons of Bodh Ram Munda and plaintiff and defendant No. 1 are descendants of Bodh Ram Munda. It is further contended by the plaintiffs that RS Khata No. 154 of Village Morhabadi has been recorded in the name of Vijay Ram Munda, Hari Ram Munda, Bhanju Munda all sons of Jaganath Munda and Baijnath Munda sons of Bodh Ram Munda and as such RS Khatian is in the joint name of the aforesaid persons and partition has already been effected amongst the recorded Raiyatas such separate possession of the plots have been recorded in the remark column of the above said Khatiyan. It is further contended that Plot No. 909 and 911 have been shown in the possession of the Baijnath Munda and Plot No. 912 has been shown in the RS Khatian in the possession of the Vijay Ram Munda, Hari Munda and Madhu Munda @ Bhanju Munda. Similarly, the plot No. 914 has been shown in the possession of the Baijnath Munda. It is further contended that Baijnath Munda died leaving behind three sons namely Rupu Munda, Jatru Munda and Chhotan Munda and Rupu Munda died leaving behind Bhikha Munda, Ramdeo Munda, Jagdeo Munda respectively as his legal heirs, Jatru Munda died leaving behind two sons namely, Sawna Munda- appellant and Jitetan Munda. Sawna Munda is plaintiff-appellant and Jitetan Munda died leaving behind two sons being the Munna Munda @ Binai Munda and Chhutan Munda @ Sanjay Munda as respondent No. 6 & 7 respectively. It is further contended that Hari Munda died leaving behind four sons namely Tulsi Munda, Barku Munda, Anand Munda and Assisan Munda whereas Tulsi Munda died leaving behind his one son namely Muku Munda-reposondent No.11.

(3.) Plaintiff further contended that Lagnu Munda has occupied the land area 43 decimal out of 1.30 acres from Hari Munda, recorded Raiyat. It is further contended that Vijay Ram Munda died leaving behind his three sons- Bali Munda, Lalit Munda and Darshan Munda and the defendant/respondent No.1 is the son of Bali Munda and other descendants of two sons of Vijay Ram Munda are not creating any trouble or are not interfering with the plaintiff's possession over the land as such they have not been impleaded by the plaintiff as the parties in the present proceeding. It is further contended that Lagnu Munda is in association of bad company and is under influence of land Mafia who are creating havoc in the entire area by forging papers, documents and by illegally occupying land particularly which belongs to schedule tribes. It is also contended that one Abdul Aziz and Abdul Sattar fraudulently manage to get the compromise decree with regard to 42 decimals of Plot No. 912, 73 decimals of plot No. 911, 59 decimals of Plot No. 914 in the year, 1963. It is further contended by the plaintiff that above said compromise decree was out come of the fraud and collusiveness as such Lalit Munda, Jatru Munda, Chhotun Munda and Rupnath Munda filed application u/S 71 A of the Schedule Areas Regulation for restoration of the land and the same has been registered as SAR Case No. 140 of 1983 and the special Officer, Ranchi by his order dated 31.01.1985 was pleased to allow the said application and restored the land of the plaintiffs. It is also contended that similarly one another case was filed by the Rupu Munda and others against Avdhesh Thakur under Section 71 A of the Schedule Area Regulation and the said case was registered as SAR Case No. 26 of 1974 and the Special Officer by his order dated 28.07.1975 restored the Plot No. 911 area 73 decimals, Plot No. 912 area 42 decimals and Plot No. 914 area 59 decimals. It is further contended by the plaintiff that respondent No. 1 never claimed his title over the property and whoever have tried or attempted to occupy the land, plaintiff's predecessor took legal steps for restoration of the land and the same was restored by the Court and as respondent No. 1 never took any interest in taking legal steps for restoration of land showing thereby that respondent No. 1 admitted that he did not have title over the land and respondent No.1 has been illegally trying to occupy the Plot No. 912 area 43 decimals, 909 area 25 dec. and 911 area 40 decimals and despite persuasion by plaintiff, respondent No. 1 is adamant to come over the property and thereafter to give the property to the land brokers and builders. It is further contended that when plaintiff constructed mud house over the portion of plot No. 911 Holding No. 170/H1, respondent No. 1 along with his associates illegally demolished the house. It is further contended that the respondent No. 1 is now trying to occupy all the plots as described in the schedule given in the plaint and if the respondent No.1 succeeds in occupying other plots of the plaintiff, plaintiff shall be put to irreparable loss and injury.