Brojendra Prasad Katakey, J.

1. This appeal by the defendants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3.7.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Sr. Div) No. 1, Kamrup at Guwahati in Title Appeal No. 56/1996 dismissing the appeal preferred by the defendants by affirming the judgment and decree dated 31.8.1996 passed by the learned Sadar Munsiff No. 1, Kamrup at Guwahati in Title Suit No. 285/1987, whereby and whereunder the suit of the plaintiffs has been decreed. The predecessor-in-interest of the present respondents namely, Bijoy Kr. Ganguly, as plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration of right, title and interest over the land described in the schedule to the plaint, contending inter alia that the land measuring 18 bighas 3 kathas 2 lechas covered by KP patta No. 217 and 589 comprising various dags, originally belonging to one Bikalal, after whose death it devolved on his three sons Shew Narayan Chetri, Lakhi Narayan Chetri and Narayan Chetri, each of whom got 6 bighas 1 kathas 2-2/3 lechas of land. It has further been pleaded that Shew Narayan Chetri out of his share of land sold 5 bighas 4 kathas 9-2/3 lechas by registered instrument dated 5.4.1950 (Ext. Gha) in favour of Kailash Sengupta and Snehamoyee Mitra. According to the plaintiff there was partition of the land between Kailash Sengupta and Snehamoyee Mitra in equal proportion and Kailash Sengupta out of his land fell in his share sold 1 kathas 14 lechas vide registered sale deed dated 10.4.1981 (Ext. 1) in favour of the original plaintiff namely Bijoy Kr. Ganguly. It is also the pleaded case of the plaintiff that he is possessing the land having residential houses and since the defendants without having any right, title and interest over the suit land tried to mutate their names, he has filed the suit for declaration as aforesaid. It was also pleaded in the plaint that Kailash Sengupta before transferring the land instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 24/1967 and obtained a decree on 18.9.1967 (Ext. 3) against Bijoy Kumar Ganguly namely the plaintiff and Snehamoyee Mitra, as defendant and proforma defendant, respectively, claiming that the suit land belongs to Kailash Sengupta and in respect of which Bijoy Kr Ganguly, the plaintiff, was the tenant. According to the plaintiff after the decree was passed the land was sold by Kailash Sengupta vide sale deed dated 10.4.1981.

2. The main defendants, mainly the present appellants, contested the suit by filing written statement contending inter alia that the defendant No. 1 purchased 1 katha 17 lechas of land by registered sale deed dated 15,7.1982 (Ext. Kha) from Snehamoyee Mitra who along with Kailash Sengupta purchased from the original owner Shew Narayan Chetri. According to the defendants the suit land forms part of the land purchased by the defendant No. 1 by the aforesaid sale deed dated 15.7.1987 (Ext. Kha) and by virtue of such purchase the mutation has been granted as they were found to be in possession. The claim of the plaintiff that he is in possession has also been denied in the written statement filed. The defendant also raised the question of maintainability of the suit under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act.

3. Based oil the pleadings of the parties the trial court framed the following issues for determination: -

"1. Whether the suit is maintainable?

2. Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties?

3. Whether there is cause of action for the suit?

4. Whether the suit has been properly valued and proper court fee has been paid thereon?

5. Whether the plaintiff has right, title, interest and possession over the suit land?

6. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to declare as prayed for?

7. To what relief the parties may be entitled?"

4. The trial court on the basis of the evidence, both oral and documentary, decreed the suit of the plaintiff declaring the right, title and interest. The appeal preferred by the defendants has also been dismissed by the first appellat