HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
T. Amarnath Goud, J.
Arpana Malakar @ Aparna Malakar & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Sub-divisional Magistrate Kailashahar & Ors. - Respondents
RSA 52 of 2018
Decided On : 24-02-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of ownership and land dispute (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. defendants' claims regarding forged documents (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. trial court's findings and decisions (Para 8 , 10 , 14) |
| 4. appellate court's reversal of trial court decisions (Para 9 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. court's directive for remand and re-examination (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
1. This is an appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, 1908 against the impugned Judgment & Decree dated 12.09.2018, passed by the learned District Judge, Unakoti Judicial District Kailashahar, in Title Appeal 3 of 2016, whereby learned District Judge, Unakoti Judicial District, Kailashahar, reversed the Judgment & Decree dated 30.09.2013 & 01.10.2013 respectively, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kailashahar, North Tripura District Judiciary in Title Suit No.23 of 2011.
2. The short of the plaintiffs' case (the appellants herein) is that the land measuring 0.791 acres of khatian no.4940 under Kailashahar mouja pertaining to Old C.S Plot No.7398(p) corresponding to R.S. Plot No. 7180 totaling land measuring 0.426 acres and pertaining to CS Plot No. 7403 corresponding to RS Plot No.7186 totaling land measuring 0.365 described in the 1st schedule in the suit land of this suit. The land measuring 0.100 acres described in 2nd schedule was sold to plaintiff nos.6 and 7 by plaintiff no.s 1 to 5 and their deceased mother Maya Rani Malakar. The land measuring 0.691 acres described in 3rd schedule is the remaining land in the hand of plaintiff nos. 1 to 5. The plaintiff nos. 1 to 5 are the sole and ultimate legal heirs of their deceased parents Jitendra Chandra Malakar.
3. Originally the suit land along with other land was owned and possessed by one Jogendra Chandra Malakar on the strength of auction purchase vides auction certificate case No.113 of 1345 T.E issued by competent authority of then Govt. of Tripura. The said Jogendra Chandra Malakar died leaving behind him 3 sons namely (1) Jotindra Chandra Malakar, (2) Jitendra Chandra Malakar, (3) Digendra Chandra Malakar, and two daughters namely - (1) Pravashini Malakar and (2) Raj Moni Malakar. On the death of said Jogendra Chandra Malakar, his above said legal heirs became sole owners of the suit land and other land left by him. The two daughters of deceased Jogendra Chandra Malakar gifted their shares of the land including suit land left by Jogendra Chandra Malakar to their three sons of Jogendra Chandra Malakar executed and effected regular partition of the land left by their father amongst themselves vides Registered partition deed No. 1-1436 dated 16.05.1983. In that partition, the suit land along with other land fell to the exclusive share of Jitendra Chandra Malakar and on his death the present plaintiff Nos. 1 to 5 being daughters and sons became exclusive owners and possessors of the suit land and other land.
4. Thereafter, Smt. Aparna Malakar and 6 (six) others have filed the suit against Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kailashahar Sub-Division, Unakoti District & 2(two) others for declaration of right, title and interest and confirmation of possession over suit land.
5. The appellant filed the suit in the trial court for recovering of possession of the following schedules.
1st Schedule (suit land)
District-north Tripura PS Kailashahar, Tehshil - Kailashahar. Mouja - Kailashahar, Khatian No 4940.
I) Old C.S Plot No. 7398/(part) (corresponding R.S Plot No. 7180, Class- Nal, Area - 0.426 acres.
II) Old C.S Plot No. 7403 Corresponding RS Plot No. 7186, Class-Nal , Area- 0.365 Acre.
Total land area = 0.791 acre.
2nd Schedule (Sold out land)
District- P.S Tehshil- Mouja- Kailashahar, Khatian No. 4940, Old CS Plot No. 7403(part) Corresponding R.S Plot NO. 7186 (part), at the south-western portion of plot. Class-Nal, Area- 0.100 Ac. Begin bounded as below-
North- Land of plaintiff nos, 1/2/3/4/5
South- Land of plaintiff nos, 1/2/3/4/5
East- Land of plaintiff nos, 1/2/3/4/5
West- late kunjabihari Barma & late Bilash Moni Chakrabo
The appellate court's decision was deemed perverse for disregarding an unchallenged survey report on ownership, necessitating a re-evaluation of the case.
The court held that a title deed must be substantiated with clear evidence, and the Survey Commissioner's findings are critical in resolving land disputes.
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
A plaintiff can amend a suit to specify claims based on substantial evidence. Courts must consider all relevant claims and evidence to prevent erroneous dismissal.
Ownership and encroachment claims on land require clear proof and adherence to established records, emphasizing the necessity of addressing specific issues raised during the trial.
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting ownership or adverse possession, and mere entries in khatian records do not suffice to establish title without supporting evidence.
Proper identification of property ownership is essential in disputes, and prior deeds must reflect accurate details to establish rightful title.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.