Since the plaintiffs vendor, as occupancy raiyat, was a deemed intermediary under Section 52 of the Act and she was number in possession of the suit land on the date of vesting, i.e., 10.4.1956, her interest in the suit property vested in the State of West Bengal.
The suit was filed for declaration of plaintiffs title and recovery of possession of the suit land 1.80 acre of land of Mouja Durganagar P.S. Diamond Harbour .
1 and They put forward the plea that the suit was number maintainable, that they were cultivating tenants as thika tenants, under the plaintiffs vender on payment of advance rent and the land was settled with them on a permanent basis.
The Plaint property originally belonged to Haran Chandra Halader and Barada Prasad Halder, and by various gifts or other documents, Kshirodamani Dasi Became the full owner of the suit property.
The plaintiff was held entitled to recover possession with mesne profits.
On 30th June, 1954, the principle defendants defendants Nos.
Since the plaintiffs vendor, as occupancy raiyat, was a deemed intermediary under Section 52 of the Act and she was number n possession of the suit land.
1 and 2 trespassed into the suit land and dispossessed the 4th defendant.
So, neither the plaintiffs vendor number the plaintiff was entitle to retain the property under Section 6 1 d of the Act and, therefore, the suit for recovery of possession of such land is number maintainable.
The main companytesting defendants are defendant Nos.
The Plaintiffs vendor Kshirodamani never settled the suit land by granting Patta to or accepting any Kabuliyat from such trespassers.
On these and other averments the suit was filed for declaration of plaintiffs title to the suit property and for recovery of the same from the defendants.
89 of 1958, Munsif 1st Court, Diamond Harbour, is the appellant.
It is thereafter, the plaintiff in the suit obtained special leave in S.L.P. Civil No.
The West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act.
Since the plaintiffs vendor number the plaintiff was in possession of the suit land.
362 of 1961 before the Sub ordinate Judge, 8th Court, Alipore, the judgment and decree of the Munsif was set aside and the suit was dismissed.
The decree so passed by the trial companyrt was affirmed in appeal by the learned Sub ordinate Judge who also held that the defendants failed to prove their tenancy raiyats in the suit land and the first defendant never possessed the suit land in the previous years, as alleged.
The appeal was dismissed, affirming the judgment and decree of the trial companyrt dated 28.2.1961 except regarding the grant of declaration that the S. record of raiyat is incorrect.
The trial companyrt decreed the plaintiff suit.
The State pleaded that the suit was number maintainable and they have been unnecessarily impleaded.
But, in Second Appeal the companytesting defendants raised a new plea.
By judgment and decree dated 26.2.1976, the appeal was allowed and the matter was remitted to the lower appellate companyrt for a fresh disposal, in accordance with law.
The trial companyrt decreed the suit.
362/61 was disposed of by Sub Ordinate Judge, 8th Court, Alipore on 12.2.1977 .
In the appeal filed by defendant No.
It was also found that the defendants failed to establish their case, that they took settlement of the land in the suit from the plaintiffs vendor, Kshirodamani.
871/81 before the High Court of Calcutta.
1 in Title Appeal No.
The Courts companycurrently found that the suit is number maintainable and the State is an unnecessary party to the suit.
362/61.
on that day, the right and interest of the plaintiff which was only as and occupancy raiyat, vested in the State.
On the date of vesting neither the plaintiffs vendor number the plaintiff was in possession of the suit land.
Both the trial companyrt and the lower appellate companyrt had decided the cases only on questions of fact, on the basis of the pleading and the evidence led by the parties before the Trial Court.
Admittedly, this was a new plea which was never raised by the defendants at any stage of the suit.
Subsequently, the trespassers got their names recorded as Korfa tenants of the suit land at different fictitious jamas under Kshirodamani, the plaintiffs vendor, in the R.S. record.
As stated, the suit was one for declaration of title and for recovery of possession of the suit property.
The Second Appeal and the Memoranda of Cross objection were disposed of by a learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court by his judgment dated 30.11.1982.
It was to the effect that the Act came into force on 10.4.1956.
The plaintiffs vendor had sole occupancy right in 1.80 acres of land in Mauja Durganagar.
The plaintiff filed a memoranda of cross objections in the said Second Appeal against the deletion of the declaration that the R.S. record regarding the suit land is incorrect.
Abhijeet Chatterjee, Ranjan Mukherjee, Sukumar Ghose, Girish Chandra, Rathin Das, D.P. Mukherjee, Advs.
After remit, Title Appeal No.
The companytesting principle defendants trespassed into the suit land and dispossessed the 4th defendant on 30.6.1954.
The suit was decreed on 28.2.1961.
It was found that the plaintiff has title to the suit land and the defendants have numbertenancy right in the property.
Advs.,
The defendants assailed the companycurrent judgments and decrees of the companyrts below by filing Second Appeal No.
Incidentally, there was a prayer for declaration that the entries in the R.S. record are erroneous.
The defendants in the suit are the respondents.
with them for the appearing parties.
J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered PARIPOORNAN, J. The plaintiff in title suit No.
Kshirodamani was found to be in possession of the suit land.
1953, hereinafter referred to as the Act came into force on 10.4.1956.
10083/83 by order passed by this Court dated 4.11.1986 and the companysequent Civil Appeal is before us.
She possessed such land during the material period through the 4th defendant with whom the land was settled annually on advance rent.
The third defendant is the State of West Bengal.
The plaintiff purchased the suit property from Kshirodamani Dasi by registered Deed dated 12 Baisakh, 1365.
