9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Brief facts in nutshell for proper adjudication of the dispute involved in the present appeal are, the Plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction alleging that suit Schedule property originally belongs to Raja A.P. Singh Deo of estate of Seraikella. Later the property was purchased by Kumar Subodh Singh Deo vide registered Sale Deed No. 3201 dated 4.12.1989. He, in turn, sold the property to the Plaintiff vide registered Sale Deed dated 8.8.1990 for a consideration of Rs. 12,000/- and since then he is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by constructing a residential building in the land. While that being so, the Defendant-Board has issued notice dated 4.1.1992 asking the Plaintiff to quit and give vacant possessio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olding that suit is not barred under any of the provisions of the B.S.H.B. Act, CNT Act and the Limitation Act. Though Court took note of Ex.-B-letter of giving possession to the Defendant has come to the conclusion that the evidence on record does not establish that the land acquisition proceedings have attained finality. With regard to maintainability of a suit for injunction, Court gave a finding that as the Plaintiff is able to prove his possession by oral and documentary evidence, he can maintain a simplicitor suit for injunction without seeking the relief of declaration. 5. The unsatisfied Defendant approached the 1st Additional District Judge, Singhbhum (West) at Seraikella by way of Title Appeal No. 46/1995. The 1st Appellate Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it land was a private property and Respondent No. 1 herein got the ownership rights by virtue of a registered sale deed No. 2343 executed on 7th August, 1990 and since then the property has been in his possession. He could prove his possession and prima facie title to the property. It is further stated that without claiming the relief of declaration of title, he can maintain the suit for mere injunction and Courts below have rightly and concurrently found that he is in possession of the property. 9. We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent and perused the material available on record. In view of the concurrent finding of facts by the courts below we are conscious of the limited scope of adjudication in this ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
