A suit for declaration of title over undivided property without partition is not maintainable, reaffirming the necessity of establishing specific ownership for claims over joint property.

JUDGMENT :

A.C. Behera, J.

1. This 2^nd Appeal has been preferred against the partially reversing Judgment.

2. The appellants of this 2^nd Appeal were the defendants before the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No. 64 of 1983 and they were the appellants before the First Appellate Court in the 1^st Appeal vide T.A.26 of 1989.

The respondent of this 2^nd Appeal was the sole plaintiff before the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.64 of 1983 and he was the respondent before the First Appellate Court in the 1^st Appeal vide T.A. No.26 of 1989.

The suit of the plaintiff (respondent in this 2^nd Appeal) vide T.S. No.64 of 1983 against the defendants (appellants in this 2^nd Appeal) was a suit for declaration, confirmation of possession and permanent injunction in alternative recovery of possession.

3. As per the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court, the suit plot No.1746 under Khata No.291 was an anabadi land as per Sabik Settlement R.o.R and the same was under the Ex-Intermediary Estate of an Ex-Intermediary Paluni Dibya wife of Harekurshna Panda. The said Ex-Intermediary Paluni Dibya inducted 3 persons of one family i.e. Mali, Phagu & Pari in the suit properties as tenants for cultivation purpose by granting Hata Pata in their favour. On the basis of such induction through Hata Patta, Mali, Fagu & Pari possessed and cultivated the same. But, on dated 29.03.1955 Mali, Phagu & Pari sold that suit properties to Chakra Mallik (father of the plaintiff) by executing and registering a sale deed vide Ext.1 for a consideration of Rs.50/- and delivered the possession thereof. Thereafter, the purchaser Chakra Mallik reclaimed the suit properties and converted the same into homestead. While Chakra Mallik was the owner and in possession over the suit properties after purchasing the same from Mali, Phagu and Pari through Registered sale deed dated 29.03.1955 vide Ext.1, he (Chakra Mallik) died leaving behind the plaintiff as his son and successor. For which, the suit properties left by Chakra Mallik devolved upon the plaintiff. So, the plaintiff has been possessing the suit properties. In course of possession of the suit properties by the plaintiff, the suit properties have been settled in his favour through Lease Case No.5688 of 1976. On the basis of such settlement of the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff through lease case No.5688 of 1976, independent title of the plaintiff over the suit properties was created. But surprisingly, on dated 12.04.1983, the defendants tried to enter into the suit properties, for which, he (plaintiff) approached the Civil Court by filing the suit vide T.S. No.64 of 1983 against the defendants praying for declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit properties and for confirmation of his possession thereon and to injunct the defendants permanently from creating any sort of disturbance in his possession over the suit properties in alternative to recover the possession of the same from them (defendants), in case he (plaintiff) is found to be dispossessed from the same during the pendency of the suit by the defendants.

4. Having been noticed from the Trial Court in the suit vide T.S. No.64 of 1983 filed by the plaintiff, the defendants challenged the same by filing their written statement denying the allegations alleged by the plaintiff against them (defendants) taking their stands inter alia therein that:

The Ex-Landlord had inducted Mali and Phagu as the tenant in respect of Ac.0.16 Decimals of land of suit plot No.1746, for which, Mali & Phagu had half share in that Ac.0.16 Decimals of land of suit plot No.1746. One Jasoda i.e. wife of Pari w