This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 27.7.94 passed by the Assistant District Judge, Barpeta in Title Appeal No.26 of 1993. By the judgment he affirmed the earlier judgment and decree dated 16.10.93 passed by the Munsiff No.2, Barpeta in Title Suit No.25 of 1992. The learned Munsiff dismissed the suit. Hence this second appeal. 2. The following are the substantial question of law :

(1) The trial Court held that the sale of the land can not be termed as valid at the time of purchase as the suit land was Annual Patta land. The appellate Court on the other hand came to the finding that the transfer was valid only during the period of subsistence of the annual lease and it ceased to be valid as soon as the annual lease was converted to Periodic Patta and that the plaintiff can not acquire any right, title and interest over the suit land against the defendant. But both the Courts below failed to decide, whether the plaintiff could claim right, title and interest over the suit land under the provision of section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act ?

(ii) Whether on the face of the registered sale deed dated 6.3.68 duly executed by the predecessor-in-interest of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document