JUDGMENT

P. K. MISRA, J. — The plaintiff is the appellant against a reversing decision. The suit is for declaration of title, confir¬mation of possession and permanent injunction in respect of “Kha” Schedule property. It is not disputed that ‘Kha’ Schedule property is a part of ‘Ka’ Schedule property which originally belonged to one Gayaram Bhanja, who had two wives Khiramani and Bilasini. The plaintiff is the only daughter of Gayaram born through Khiramani. After the death of Gayaram, the two widows succeeded to the property. Subsequently, the plaintiff’s mother had executed a deed of gift in respect of her half share of the property in favour of the plaintiff. It is alleged that the step-mother also donated her share by oral gift and the plaintiff thus became the owner of the entire ‘Ka’ Schedule property. On 14.6.1945, Sidheswar Senapati, the predecessor-in-interest of defendants 1 to 6, managed to obtain a registered sale deed from Bilasini even though the contents of the document had not been read over and explained to her. This was in respect of half share of Bilasini. Subsequently, the aforesaid Sidheswar managed to obtain another document from the plaintiff on 31.3.1952. I