The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity and impact of documentary evidence, including unregistered gift deeds and registered awards, in determining ownership of property.

Aggrieved by concurrent findings of the two Courts below dismissing Title Suit No. 104 of 1999 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division) No. 2 at Karimganj, plaintiff Smt. Ketaki Singha has preferred this second appeal.

2. Plaintiff, Ketaki Singha claimed that suit land described in Schedule-II of the plaint measuring 5 jasties is part of Schedule-I land containing 3 powas, whole of which was originally owned and possessed by Punchi Singha, the father of the plaintiff. Punchi Singha died leaving behind two sons, namely, Lalmohan Singha and Amrit Lal Singha and four daughters, namely, Kundalal Singha, Kalabati Singha, Kusum Singha and the plaintiff, Ketaki Singha. Both the brothers Lalmohan Singha and Amrit Lal Singha died unmarried and thus properties which left behind by both the brothers were owned and inherited by the four daughters. According to the plaintiff there was amicable partition among the four sisters and thereupon suit land fell in the share of the plaintiff, Ketaki Singha to the exclusion of other three sisters. As she was married to a place about 25 miles away from the suit land, she engaged her relative Babaima Singha to look after the property. A temple known as Radha Krishna Temple installed by her father Punchi Singha is still in existence on Schedule-B land and daily puja thereof is being done by said Babaima Singha at the request of the plaintiff. He also has been cultivating land on behalf of the plaintiff. During settlement operation suit land was recorded in the name of Lalmohan Singha and Amrit Lal Singha and Khaitan was also issued under the provision of Sylhet Tenancy Act. Taking advantage of the absence of the plaintiff, the defendants No. 7 to 12 entered into collusion with the official respondents No. 1 to 6, cut down 12 nos. of beetle nut trees and two mango trees in addition to one jam tree and 7 banana trees and also started publicising that they would construct a building on the Schedule-II land for running Weaving Training Centre. According to the plaintiff the defendants do not have any semblance of right, title, interest and possession upon possession over the suit land and so they are liable to be injuncted by temporary and permanent decree of prohibitory injunction from entering into suit land or from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff. With these statements on fact, plaintiff prayed for a decree declaring her right, title and interest over the second schedule land described in the plaint, for confirmation of possession and also for perpetual injunction restraining defendants from entering into or raising any construction on the suit land or from dispossessing the plaintiff there from.

3. The defendants No. 1 to 6 being the authorities under the State of Assam submitted one written statement whereas private defendants being defendants No. 7 to 12 filed a separate written statement. It is the case of the defendants No. 7 to 12 that Punchi Singha did never establish Radhamadhav Temple on the suit land and Babaima Singha also is not performing puja to the deity and/or cultivating vegetable to the vacant portion of the suit land. These defendants stated that land measuring 1 Powa 3 Jasties 6 Pons covered by Dag No. 158 (Ka) and particularly described to the Schedule in the written statement was originally a jote land of Yaima Singha, father of Punchi Singha and grandfather of the plaintiff. While paying rent to the original Zamindar, namely, Giyas Uddin Choudhury and thereafter his heir Moulavi Mahi Uddin Choudhury of Umarpur, Phargana Chapghat, Dist. Earstwhile Sylhet and after the death of said Yaima Singha his son, Punchi Singha acquired the same status over the said land and continued to exercise his jote right over the land paying the annual rent (Khajna) to the landlord and they were granted farag by the zamindar. The original zamindar left 2 powa of the aforesaid land as Dharmattor land for religious use by the Manipuri tenants pursuing Hindu