IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

S.A. No. 474 of 2015

1. Sukhdeo Oraon

2. Baldeo Oraon

3. Jagdeo Oraon

4. Sanicharwa Oraon

5. Suraj Oeraon

6. Jhuran Orao

7. Dasai Oraon..….......

Appellants

Versus

1. Banti Orain

2. Bandhini Orain

3. Deputy Commissioner, Gumla

4. Chanda Oraon

5. Ladman Oraon

6. Deputy Commissioner, Gumla…………

Respondents

……

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

……

For the Appellants

: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondents

: ----

……

6/25.11.2021

This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated

26.05.2015, passed in Title Appeal No. 35 of 2006, by the Principal

District Judge, Gumla, whereby the appellate court affirmed the judgment

and decree dated 25.05.2006, passed in Title Suit No. 29 of 1994 by the

Sub-Judge-I, Gumla.

2.

Challenging the concurrent finding, the appellants-plaintiffs have

filed this appeal.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellants. Counsel for the

appellants raised only ground that as per the Tribal Custom the daughters

cannot inherit the property in question, thus, the permission accorded by

the Authority to gift the land in favour of his daughters by Bhupan Oraon,

is absolutely bad and is against the provision of law.

4.

A plaint was filed, which was registered as Title Suit No. 29 of

1994, by the plaintiffs, appellants herein, claiming that the plaintiffs are

the nearest agnates of Bhupan Oraon and Bhupan Oraon by a plain gift

deed, gifted the property to both his daughters, but later on, said Bhupan

Oraon applied for permission before the S.D.O., Gumla under Section 46

of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act. Said permission case was registered as

137 of 1991-92. Permission was granted in favour of Bhupan Oraon to

transfer the land in favour of his daughters. Said transfer was challenged

in permission Appeal No. 31 of 1991-92, but the said appeal was also

dismissed. It is stated that after obtaing the permission, said Bhupan

Oraon executed a registered gift deed in favour of his daughters on

25.05.1992. The plaintiffs’ case is that the daughters of Bhupan Oeran are

-2-

not entitled to inherit any property of Bhupan Oraon as per the customary

law, thus the suit should have been decreed.

4.

The defendants appeared and filed their written statements and

stated that in the year 1957 Bhupan Oraon, by a Sada Punchanama

Bakshish (Deed of Gift), gifted the land in favour of his two daughters. The

daughters came in possession over the said land and a mutation case

being Mutation Case No. 27 of 1958-59 was opened and by virtue of the

order passed in the mutation case they are paying rent to the Government.

They further stated that some well wishers in the year 1992 advised

Bhupan Oraon to seek permission from the competent authority under the

Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act and obtain permission under Section 46 of the

said Act. Bhupan Oraon thereafter, obtained permission from the

competent authority, which permitted Bhupan Oraon to execute gift deed.

Pursuant to the said permission, a registered gift deed was executed

whereby Bhupan Oraon gifted his landed property to his daughters.

5.

The trial court after evaluating the oral and documentary

evidence, has held that the plaintiffs have failed to establish their case

against the defendants and nor the plain gift deed is on record. Further,

the trial court concluded that the land in question was not a joint property

of the ancestors of the appellants and the respondents. The trial court also

held that the defendants had proved that the land was duly partitioned.

The trial court also held that the order granting permission in favour of the

daughters of Bhupan Oraon and the judgment passed in the subsequent

appeal at the behest of these appellants attained finality and the plaintiffs

failed to establish their case that the permission was obtained erroneously.

6.

The