- (1.)The Defendants are Appellants. Judgments and decrees of both the courts below have gone against them.
(2.)The Plaintiffs had filed title suit in the court of Subordinate Judge, Jamshedpur, seeking declaration that they have right, title and possession over the suit land and that their possession be confirmed, The Plaintiffs have also prayed for a decree for permanent Injunction, restraining the Defendants from Interfering with the peaceful possession of the Plaintiffs over the suit land.
(3.)The Plaintiffs' case, in short, was that the original Defendant No. 1 was the wife of Defendant No. 2 and both were living together in the same house. Defendant No. 2 sold a piece of land, measuring 100' X 80' of Plot No. 16, appertaining to Khata No. 1 of Mouza Mango, to one Md. Badruddin. Said Badruddin, subsequently, constructed a house, consisting of three rooms over a portion of the land. Name of Badruddin was also recorded in the provisional survey record in 1964. New survey plot was numbered as Plot No. 325. Said Badruddin sold his land to one Abdul Hamid, measuring an area of 35' X 180' from east to west on the southern side, by virtue of registered sale deed dated 19th April, 1971. The purchaser Abdul Hamid came in possession. In exercise of his right of ownership, he, subsequently, sold the said land to the original Plaintiff. The land was resurveyed in the year 1971 and Plot No. 325 was recorded as new Survey Plot No. 1523 under Khata No. 1249. The said land of Plot No. 1523 is the suit land, which is fully described in Schedule-A of the plaint. The residential house and shops of the Defendants in Plot No. 1524 are situated just adjoining to Plot No. 1523. There is a compound wall between said two plots, running from east to west. The compound wall belongs to the Plaintiffs. The Defendants have got no right, title and interest over the suit plot, but the dependents falsely claimed that the boundary wall is standing over their land. The dispute had given rise to a proceeding under Section 107 Code of Criminal Procedure The Defendants had also filed an application under Section 90 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, Waking the Plaintiffs as parties, in the court of Revenue Officer, Jamshedpur. The Plaintiffs were not made parties in the said proceeding. Only Abdul Hamid was made party to the said proceeding, who had no longer any interest over the said plot. In the application under Section 90 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, the Defendants had claimed that his land of Plot No. 1524 has been wrongly included in the area of Plot No. 1523 and they prayed for correction of the record of right. On the said basis, it was claimed that the Plaintiffs have got right, title and possession over the suit land.