JUDGMENT :

K.P. Mohapatra, J. - This is against the judgments dismissing his suit and recovery of possession.

2. The Appellant is the Plaintiff. His case is that the suit lands belonged to his father Brunda Rana. After the death of his father he inherited the same and has been in possession thereof. Respondent' No. 2 and late Ranjit are the sons of Munsi Rana, son of the brother of Brunda Rana. Respondent No. 1 is the minor son and Respondent No. 3 is the widow of late Ranjit. Late Ranjit was an Amin in the settlement department and taking advertise of his position he got the suit lands fraudulently recorded in the names of himself and his two other brothers, namely Respondent No. 2 and Anr. since deceased. Despite the fraudulent record in the settlement records, the Appellant continued to remain in possession of the same until disturbance was, cleated resulting in a proceeding u/s 144 Criminal Procedure Code which was decided against him. So it was necessary for him to institute the suit to establish his title and possession.

3. The Respondents who are Defendants stated that the suit lands are their ancestral property and have been recorded the Plaintiff's appeal for declaration of t