G.B.PATTANAIK
LAKHANA NAYAK – Appellant
Versus
BASUDEV SWAMY – Respondent
G. B. PATTANAIK, J.
( 1 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2 in a suit for partition are the appellants.
( 2 ) PLAINTIFF alleged that when the temple for the Deity was constructed sometimes in 1962, the raiyats of the village were required to render help for the purpose of seva puja and bhog of the Deity. The villagers agreed to give Schedule-A lands for the purpose. A trust deed was created and possession of lands was surrendered and plaintiff being the President of the trust remained in possession of the lands and the usufructs of the lands were being utilized for the purpose of seva puja. The villagers were earlier managing the affairs of these Koth lands through a committee selected by them and the committee had the authority to make alienations in case of necessity. The said committee alienated 66 cents out of plot No. 568 to Magata Nahak and said Magata Nahak had been in possession of the same. The villagers also had alienated some lands to village schools as mentioned in Schedule-C and had set apart lands covered by Schedule-B for the common purpose and, therefore, those lands are not liable to be partitioned. So far as plot No. 99 is concerned, according to the plaint though it is recorde
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.