MD. ALAY RASUL MIAN Vs. MD. NAZMUDDIN MIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Atanu Banerjee, the learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) The appellant has preferred this Second Appeal against the judgment dated 27.05.2014 and decree following thereupon drawn on 10.06.2014 passed in Title Appeal No.6 of 2010 passed by the learned District & 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chatra whereby the said Title Appeal has been dismissed against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2009 passed by the learned Munsif, Chatra in Title Suit No.26 of 2006.

(3.) The case of the appellant before the trial court was that the plaintiff is the owner of the property duly mentioned in schedule-A to the plaint. The plaintiff has acquired the land of Khata No.1/9, Plot No.9/25, 6.17 acres of village Palha Pragna Dantar, Police Station- Huntergunj, District-Chatra by virtue of a registered deed of gift vide gift deed No.1944 dated 19.03.1991 from Masomat Nago wife of late Sakur Mian and came in khas cultivating possession over the gifted land. The plaintiff/ appellant is the sister's son of Most. Nago, who was serving his aunt (mausi) since long as there was none to look after her. The property which has been acquired by the plaintiff from Masomat Nago by means of gift deed duly mentioned in the Schedule-A to the plaint. Originally the lands of khata No.1/9 plot No.09/25 of village Palha Pragna Danmtar, Police Station-Huntergunj at present P.S. Bashishth Nagar, Jori was recorded in the survey record of right as G.M. Khas land Malik Ramgarh Raj. The further case of the appellant was that one Salamat Mian who was settled raiyat of the village Palha took settlement of 6.17 acres of land in suit plot No.9/25 of khata No.1/9 with other lands from ex-landlord Ramgarh Raj rectified by hukumnama and came in possession over the same from the date of settlement. The settlee Salamat Mian paid rent to the ex-landlord and after vesting of village to State demanded for the settled land and opened in the name of Salamat Mian. Salamat Mian also paid rent to the Government and thereafter obtained government rent receipts. The said Salama Mian who was in physical possession over the settled land but in the year 1968 due to some urgency and to meet his urgent need he transferred the suit land in the year 1968 vide registered Sale Deed to his daughter Nago Devi doner of the plaintiff and put her in khas possession over the same. Thereafter, Nago Devi after purchase came in exclusive possession over the same and exercised her all sorts of rights over the same. The name of the purchaser Nago Devi was mutated in the Serista of government vide Mutation Case No.12/1969-70 and she paid rent to the State and obtained government rent receipts. The further case of the plaintiff was that the defendants who are nephew of Mostt. Nago, gave a false assurance to maintain her and on such false assurance the defendants got a registered sale deed executed by Mostt. Nago on 03.02.1977 in their favour without payment of a single farthing agreeing that they will execute a deed of agreement in favour of Mostt. Nago Devi. A false promoise was made by the defendants that they will maintain the vendor Mostt. Nago and will provide food, clothing, etc. failing which the said Nago Devi will have a right to cancel the deed and they came in permissive possession over the same. The said Mostt. Nago Devi executed the deed of sale on 03.02.1977 in favour of defendants , namely, Md. Nizamuddin Mian and Md. Manauwar Mian and on the same day after executing the agreement in favour of Mostt. Nago handed over the same to her. They maintained Nago Devi for sometime and she cancelled the aforesaid deed vide registered deed of cancellation No.5279 dated 02.11.1985. It is the further case of the plaintiff that one Manauwar Mian being a son of Choikidar of Bashisth Nagar P.S. started creating trouble and mischief with Mostt. Nago Devi and the defendants became rigid to disturb the peaceful possession of Mostt. Nago as such seeing no alternative she filed a petition before the learned S.D.M., Chatra. A proceeding under section 144 of Cr.P.C. was also drawn up. The said Mostt. Nago executed deed of gift in favour of plaintiff on 25.04.1991 and handed over her title and possession over the suit land to the plaintiff and since then the plaintiff became the absolute owner of the suit property. The defendats filed appeal before the A.C. Hazaribag against the order of the learned Land Reforms Deputy Collector who after condoning the delay admitted the appeal and after establishment of new District Record re-transferred to the file of Additional Collector, Chatra and in the meantime the said Nago Devi died and on 09.07.1999 the plaintiff Aley Rasool was made party on 21.07.1999 replacing the name of Most. Nago Devi. The Additional Collector passed the order setting aside the order of L.R.D.C. by admitting the time barred appeal of the defendants vide order dated 12.05.2006. The defendants on 10.07.2006 held out threats to the plaintiff to spoil the paddy grown by the plaintiff over the suit land. The further case of the appellant is that the defendants had no right to claim the suit property as their sale deed has already been cancelled by Mostt.Nago for breach of contract. The status of the defendants became trespassers. The plaintiff is having a valid right, title, interest and possession over the suit land by remaining continuous possession over the suit land over 12 years has acquired the right of adverse possession also over the same.