This second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 5.9.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Morigaon in Title Appeal No. 15/2003 affirming the judgment and decree dated 11.4.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Morigaon in Title Suit No. 26/1995.

2. The suit was filed by Paresh Chandra Hazarika @ Probodh Chandra Hazarika and Prodip Chandra Hazarika. It is not disputed that Prodip Chandra Hazarika died a bachelor during pendency of the suit.

3. The case of the plaintiffs, as projected in the plaint, is that land measuring 2 bighas 3 kathas 17 lechas covered by Dag No. 252 of Periodic Patta No. 21 of Rajagaon Kissam under Mouza-Morigaon belonged to one Kera Kaibarta and Bijia Das @ Bejia Das purchased a portion of land measuring 1 bigha 2 kathas 10 lechas out of the said land and his name was accordingly mutated on 24.1.1975 and subsequently, based on the mutation, land record was corrected on 6.6.1978. Bijia Das sold 1 bigha of land to the plaintiffs by executing a registered sale deed No. 991 dated 9.6.1978 for a consideration amount of Rs. 2,000/- and delivery of possession of the land was given on the date of execution and accordingly, the plaintiffs were in possession of the suit land by erecting bamboo fencing and planting various kinds of trees. The names of the plaintiffs were mutated on 4.12.1986 in Misc. Case No.499/85-86 and consequently, land record was also corrected on 18.7.1987. The plaintiff No. 1 applied for obtaining permission on 23.9.1992 for constructing a residential building to the Morigaon Town Committee and after obtaining permission, the plaintiffs had made preparation for construction of the building by collecting building materials. As the construction works were about to be started, the defendants on 1.10.1992 approached the plaintiff No. 1 with a request to allow them to reside in a small portion of the suit land till the construction works were completed as they had become landless consequent upon sale of the entire land belonging to Bijia Das. The plaintiffs allowed the defendants to stay on one portion of the land. Accordingly, the principle defendants constructed a thatched house on the land measuring 10 lechas, which is described in Schedule C to the plaint. For financial constraint, the construction work could not be undertaken and taking advantage of the situation, the defendants filed a mutation appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Revenue, Morigaon for cancellation of the mutation granted on 4.12.1986. Failure of the defendants to vacate the land despite repeated requests necessitated the plaintiffs to file the suit. Accordingly, in the suit, prayer was made for decree of declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land described in Schedule A to the plaint, confirmation of possession in respect of the land described in Schedule B to the plaint and for recovery of possession in respect of the land described in Schedule C to the plaint.

4. The principle defendant Nos.1 to 3 filed written statement. It was pleaded in the written statement, apart from other legal pleas, that the suit is barred by principle of adverse possession. Boundary of the land described in Schedule B was disputed. It was admitted that Bijia Das @ Bejia had purchased 1 bigha 2 kathas 10 lechas out of 2 bighas 3 kathas 17 lechas from Kera Kaibarta and accordingly, mutation was granted in his favour. The sale allegedly made by Bijia Das measuring 1 bigha to the plaintiffs by registered sale deed No. 991 dated 9.6.1978 and delivery of possession was denied with the assertion that Bijia Das and his family members were continuously in possession of the suit land till his death in the year 1987 and after his death, the defendants are continuously in possession of the suit land by residing in the dwelling houses constructed by Bijia Das. The averments made in the plaint to the effect that possession was delivered was stoutly denied and it was