A claim for title through adverse possession requires proof of hostile possession, which was not established by the plaintiffs, leading to dismissal of their appeals.

JUDGMENT :

A.C. BEHERA, J.

1. Both the Second Appeals have been preferred against the confirming judgment.

2. Since both these 2^nd appeals vide R.S.A. Nos.29 of 2002 and R.S.A. No.30 of 2002 have arisen out of an analogous judgment and decree passed in T.A. No.7 of 2000 and T.A. No.8 of 2000 in connection with the judgments and decrees passed in T.S. No.75 of 1996 and T.S. No.115 of 1997 in respect of the same suit properties vide Hal Khata No.48, Plot No.4, Area Ac.14.00 Jalasaya-I in village Upardiha under Sadar Police Station in the District of Keonjhar, then, both these 2^nd appeals are taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common judgment.

3. The Appellant in the 2^nd appeal vide R.S.A. No.29 of 2002 i.e. Harihar Mohanta was the Plaintiff in the suit vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 before the learned trial court and appellant before the learned 1^st Appellate Court in the first appeal vide T.A. No.7 of 2000. The Respondents in the 2^nd appeal vide R.S.A. No.29 of 2002 were the Defendants before the trial court in the suit vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 and Respondents before the 1^st Appellate Court in the first appeal vide T.A. No.7 of 2000.

4. The Appellants in the Second Appeal vide R.S.A. No.30 of 2002 i.e. Budhadeva Mohanta and seven others were the Plaintiffs before the trial court in the suit vide T.S. No.115 of 1997 and Appellants before the 1^st Appellate Court in the first appeal vide T.A. No.8 of 2000. The Respondents in this 2nd appeal vide R.S.A. No.30 of 2002 were the Defendants before the trial court in the suit vide T.S. No.115 of 1997 and Respondents before the 1^st Appellate Court in the first appeal vide T.A. No.8 of 2000.

5. Both the suits of the Plaintiffs vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 and T.S. No.115 of 1997 were the suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

6. The suit properties in both the suits vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 and T.S. No.115 of 1997 are the same properties vide Plot No.4, Area Ac.14.00 Jalasaya-I under Hal Khata No.48 in village Upardiha under Sadar Police Station in the District of Keonjhar.

7. The Plaintiffs in both the suits vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 and T.S. No.115 of 1997 belong to one family and they are kin relatives of each other.

8. The case of the Plaintiffs in both the suits vide T.S. No.75 of 1996 and T.S. No.115 of 1997 against the Defendants are identical in nature and the prayers in both the suits are same.

9. The suit land is a Bandh (Jalasaya) vide Plot No.4, Ac.14.00 Jalasaya-I under Khata No.48 in village Upardiha under Sadar Police Station in the District of Keonjhar described in the Schedule of the Plaint. 10. As per the case of the Plaintiffs, their ancestors/predecessors had encroached the suit Bandh (Jalasaya) and they had excavated the said Bandh (Jalasaya) on the day of Makar Sankaranti in the year 1901 and since then, their predecessors were in possession over the same and after the death of their predecessors (Ancestors), they (Plaintiffs) along with their other family members have been jointly possessing the same and they are carrying on pisciculture in the same and they are also irrigating their adjacent cultivable lands from that suit Bandh (Jalasaya). As such, their predecessors and after them the Plaintiffs along with their family members are in open, actual, continuous and adverse possession over the said suit Bandh (Jalasaya) to the knowledge of all concerned including the Defendants and by virtue of their long and continuous possession over the suit Bandh (Jalasaya) for more than 30 years, the title of the Defendants (State and Gram Panchayat) in that s