A plaintiff cannot claim easement rights over government land against a defendant without involving the state as an interested party, making such a suit for injunction unmaintainable.

JUDGMENT :

A.C. Behera, J.

This Second Appeal has been preferred against the confirming judgment.

2. The appellant in this Second Appeal was the defendant before the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.677 of 1994 and appellant before the 1^st Appellate Court in the first appeal vide T.A. No.34 of 1998.

The original respondent in this 2nd Appeal i.e. Prahallad Prahan was the plaintiff before the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.677 of 1994 and respondent before the 1^st Appellate Court in the 1^st appeal vide T.A. No. 34 of 1998.

When, during the pendency of the 2^nd Appeal, the respondent expired, then, his LRs. have been substituted in his place as respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(e).

3. The suit of the plaintiff (original respondent in this 2^nd appeal) vide T.S. No.677 of 1994 against the defendant (appellant in the 2^nd appeal) was a suit for permanent injunction simpliciter.

The properties described in Schedule “A” and “B” of the plaint are suit properties. The Schedule “A” suit properties are Ac.0.00^1/4 decimals out of Ac.0.02^1/4 decimals of Sabik Plot No.270 under Sabik Khata No.15 in Mouza Madhipur under Nimapara Tahasil in the District of Puri.

The Schedule “B” properties are Ac.0.01^1/2 decimals of Sabik Plot No.29 under Sabik Khata No.38 in Mouza Madhipur under Nimapara Tahasil in the District of Puri.

4. According to the plaintiff, the suit Sabik Plot No.270 Ac.0.87 decimals under Khata No.15 was originally recorded in the name of Krupa Gochhayat son of Sadei, Kela Gochhayat and Giria Gochhayat both are sons of Dina Gochhayat in the finally published settlement R.o.R. of the year 1927. As per amicable partition between the above recorded owners, Krupa Gochhayat got 50% share from the western side and Kela Gochhayat and Giria Gochhayat got the eastern half of suit Sabik Plot No.270. Accordingly, Krupa possessed Ac.0.43^1/2 decimals from western side of suit Sabik Plot No.270. Kela and Giria possessed Ac. Ac.0.43^1/2 decimals from the eastern side of the suit Sabik Plot No.270. Thereafter, Kela and Giria sold Ac.0.07^1/6 decimals land out of their allotted share Ac.0.43^1/2 decimals from suit Sabik Plot No.270 to the plaintiff for a consideration amount of Rs.270/- by executing and registering a sale deed on dated 01.02.1967 and delivered possession thereof. The said sold land i.e. Ac.0.07^1/6 decimals from suit Sabik Plot No.270 in favour of the plaintiff by Kela and Giria are situated in two patches. One patch is Ac.0.02^1/4 decimals and the other patch is 0.04^11/12 decimals and accordingly, he (plaintiff) is in continuous possession over his aforesaid purchased land i.e. Ac.0.07^1/6 decimals in suit Sabik Plot No.270 since 01.02.1967 till yet. The Schedule “A” suit land is the part of the above purchased land of the plaintiff from suit Sabik Plot No.270. The plaintiff is also in possession of Schedule “B” land, which is adjacent to the Schedule “A” land. The Schedule “B” land is under Khata No.38, Plot No.29, which is a Government land. While the plaintiff was continuing his possession as such over the Schedule “A” land, it was detected that, the sale deed, which was executed on 01.02.1967 by Kela and Giria were defective for want of permission under the O.L.R. Act, because, Kela and Giria were the Schedule Caste persons. For which, Kela and Giria applied before the Revenue Officer, Puri by filing O.L.R. case No.163 of 1971 under Section 22 of the O.L.R. Act, 1960 for granting them permission to sell the Schedule “A” land along with other lands (those were sold by them on dated 01.02.1967 to the plaintiff) and their prayer for permission through O.L.R. Case No.163 of 1971 was granted in their fav