The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of proving claims with evidence, admitting documents into evidence without objection, and prioritizing the content of documents over their description in pleadings.

Heard Mr. M.H. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. A. Barkataky, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 14.01.2004, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Morigaon, in Title Appeal No. 25/03, setting aside the judgment and decree dated 08.08.2003, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division No. 2, in Title Suit No. 16/99.

3. The original plaintiff died during the pendency of the suit and the present respondents are her sons, Momin Ali and Islam Uddin through her two husbands.

4. The appeal was admitted to be heard by an order dated 11.05.2004 on the following substantial question of law:

“Whether the registered Relinquishment Deed, executed in the year 1969 in favour of the appellant along with delivery of possession could be retracted from after expiry of more than 30 years claiming recovery of possession affecting the appellant by removing their residential premises?”

5. On 17.06.2015, two further substantial questions of law were framed, which are as follows:

“1. Whether the learned Lower Appellate Court was correct in holding that Ext. ‘Kha’ is not genuine?

2. Whether the learned Lower Appellate Court was correct in concluding ‘Ext.- ‘Ga’, in absence of any challenge, to be not a valid deed?”

6. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the parties that Ext.-‘Ka’ has been wrongly recorded as Ext.-‘Ga’ in the second substantial question of law framed on 17.06.2015.

7. Ext.-‘Ga’ shall be read as Ext.-‘Ka’ in the substantial question of law No. 2 framed on 17.06.2015.

8. The original plaintiff, Ramjani Begum, pleaded that the suit land, comprising in three distinct and separate plots of land, indicated as Schedule-A, measured 15 Bigha 1 Katha and 9 Lecha in different Dags and pattas and the same originally belonged to one Kashem Sheikh. Her mother Kulsum Bibi had earlier married one Numai Ali and, through the aforesaid marriage, defendant No. 1, Andheri Begum, Pro forma defendant No. 1, Hozi Sheikh and pro forma defendant No. 2, Joneki Begum were born. Kashem Sheikh had married one Karpati Begum and she died issueless. Kulsum divorced Numai and, after death of Karpati, got married to Kashem and, out of that wedlock, plaintiff was born. When Kulsum married Kashem, she had brought her children from her earlier marriage to the house of Kashem. Ramjani married one Momin Ali and, after obtaining divorce, she married Mohammad Hussain and started living in Lahorighat, some distance away from the suit land. The case projected is that she was given half portion of the property left behind by Kashem through an amicable partition made by the villagers and the rest half portion was given to the children of Kulsum from her earlier marriage. Though she was entitled to inherit the entire estate of Kashem being his daughter, she consented to the amicable partition for avoiding disputes. She was possessing the land by giving the same on “Adhi” and, at times, also by engaging her own labourers. In the month of February, 1999, when she had gone to the suit land with her labourers, she was obstructed by the principal defendants from entering into the suit land and they started claiming the same to be their own land. With the aforesaid pleadings, the plaintiff filed the suit for Schedule-B land, which is a part of Schedule-A land, whereby half portion of all the three plots of land, as indicated in Schedule-A, was claimed alongwith recovery of khas possession.

9. In the written statement filed by Andheri, defendant No. 1, she pleaded that while the plaintiff was the younger sister, she was the elder daughter of Kashem Sheikh, who had no son or other daughter. Kashem had executed a registered gift deed on 30.03.1957, being gift deed No. 956/57, in favour of his minor daughters to protect their interest. She had married one Kulamoni Sheikh, who was residing in the house of Kashem. The plaintiff met one Bangladeshi nat