A valid land allotment must be canceled before a subsequent allotment can be deemed lawful, reaffirming the plaintiffs' ownership rights and possession under the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act.

JUDGMENT

T. Amarnath Goud, J. - Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Abir Baran, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Mr. B. N. Majumder, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. This appeal has been filed under Section-96 of CPC against the judgment dated 17th January, 2020 passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in connection with Title Suit No.01 of 2018 by, whereby and whereunder, the learned Court below partly decreed the suit of the plaintiff-appellants.

3. The factual aspects of the case of the appellants in brief are as follows:

3.1. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that the Defendant No. 3 of this case while designated as Sub-Divisional Officer, Belonia, South Tripura before creation of Santirbazar Revenue Sub-Division and was acting as Collector by exercising power under provision of TLR & LR Act, 1960 for the purpose of giving allotment of Govt. land at that time had allotted 0.910 acres of nul classes land pertaining to Hal Plot No. 7027 of Mouja and T.K. Santirbazar to the present plaintiffs by issuing Allotment Order No. 788/96, dated 17.06.1996 under provision of said TLR & LR Act. It is the case of the plaintiffs that this land in fact was purchased by his predecessor Jatindra Kr. Datta in the 1954 by registered deed, but in the year 1965 during the last survey settlement operation the land was recorded in the Raioti Khatian vide Plot No. 743 of Mouja: Santirbazar in the name of their predecessor Jatindra Kr. Datta, but at the time of final publication of the Khatian, the said land was recorded in the Khash Khatian Bearing No. 1 of Mouja: Santirbazar and in the remark column i.e. in column No. 24 of the said Khatian, the name of Jatindra Kr. Datta and his two brothers were recorded as forceful possessors of the said land and thereafter on completion of revisional survey operation, the land has been recorded in Khash Khatian No. 1/224 of Mouja & T.K. Santirbazar. After final publication of Revisional Khatian 1/244 in the year 1994, Radha Raman Datta and Hari Raman Datta gave the declaration stating that their elder brother Jatindra Kr. Datta in the 1954 purchased the said land by registered deed No. 236, dated 10.02.1954 in the name of Jatindra Kr. Datta, Radha Raman Datta and Hari Raman Datta and the entire consideration of money was paid by Jatindra Kr. Datta and since the date of purchase. Said Jatiandra Kr. Datta was in constructive possession of the said land and after his death, his legal heirs were continuing the said possession and as such they have no objection to correct or rectify the said Khash Khatian in the name of their predecessor in interest. While the plaintiffs approached to the competent authority with all of those documents showing their right over the said land then the land was allotted in the name of plaintiffs in the year 1996. It is averted that since the year 1954 till date the land was/is under constructive and physical possession of the predecessor of the plaintiffs and after his death the plaintiffs are continuing the said possession. It is also stated that the defendant No. 3 did not open a new record of right in favour of the plaintiffs on the basis of allotment order.

3.2. But still the plaintiffs were possessing the allotted land and continued to cultivate the land and produced paddy therein, but no record of right was created in favour of them and the plaintiffs had continued uninterrupted physical possession over the land till the year 2013. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that i