Pleadings of the parties in both the suits are almost similar. The points of law in both the second appeals are identical. Judgments passed by the trial Court as well as the first appellate Court are also almost identical in both the cases and hence both the appeals were heard together and this common judgment is passed in respect of both the second appeals.

2. Both the second appeals have been admitted on the following identical substantial questions of law:-

“(i) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and the appellate Court suffers from perversity?”

3. FACTS OF RSA NO.37 OF 2011:

3.1 Appellant as plaintiff (hereinafter mentioned as plaintiff) instituted Title Suit No.23 of 2006 against the defendant-respondents (hereinafter mentioned as defendants) in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Udaipur, South Tripura seeking declaration of his right, title and interest and for recovery of possession of the suit land described in the schedule of the plaint from defendant Nos.1 and 2.

3.2. The plaintiff, inter alia contended that the suit land was a khas land of the Government of Tripura (respondent No.3) which was lying with full of jungles. About 40 years