This appeal is by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Gauhati affirming the judgment and decree of the Assistant District Judge Barpeta dismissing the plaintiffs' suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession and in the alternative for recovery of possession.

The plaintiffs claimed to be the owners of the suit land. They also claimed that they were in possession thereof. As there was a threat of dis­possession from 'he defendants the suit was filed. It is slated that during the pendency of the suit there was actual dispossession also. A suit was, there­fore, filed for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and in the alternative recovery of possession. The defendants contested the suit on the ground, inter alia, that the defendants were in possession of the suit land since 1967 and, as such, they have acquired title over the suit land. In other words they claimed adverse possession over the suit land. The trial Court held that the plaintiffs had succeeded in proving the title. It held that as the plaintiffs had not claimed recovery of possession, there was no cause of action and the suit was not maintainable. Accordingly the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document