1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.09.2008, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No. 2384/2008 dismissing the proceeding on holding that the judgment dated 08.04.2008, rendered by the Assam Board of Revenue, Guwahati in Case No. 46RA(DBR/06) does not suffer from any infirmity.

2. We have heard Mr. T.C. Khatri, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the appellants and also heard Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal, in short, are that, Nidhi Rani Khullar (since deceased), predecessor in interest of respondent No. 1 to 11, purchased 2 plots of land with separate registered deeds, such deeds being deed dated 16.12.1946 and deed dated 08.06.1953. On the strength of aforesaid sale deeds, Nidhi Rani Khullar instituted a suit in the court of District Judge, Dhubri seeking partition and Khas possession of the suit property therein, area of same being 2 kathas only. Such suit was numbered as T.S. No. 10/1975.

4. The said suit was initially dismissed as not maintainable one for which plaintiff therein, she being Nidhi Rani Khullar, preferred an appeal before this court which was registered as FA No. 88/1979. This court on hearing the learned counsel for the parties by its judgment dated 03.08.1987 held that suit is maintainable and thus, remanded the case for adjudication in accordance with law.

5. Pursuant to such order, learned District Judge, Dhubri on hearing the learned counsel for the parties was pleased to decree the suit allowing the partition in respect of aforesaid 2k of land and in that connection, he also drew a preliminary decree vide judgment dated 14.11.1988. The decree holder, thereafter, on 19.02.1992 filed a petition before the Revenue Authority for affecting partition in terms of the decree passed by the Civil Court in T.S No. 10/1975.

6. On the basis of such a petition, partition case No. 3/1992-93 was registered by Collector, Dhubri and same was subsequently came to be transferred to the Settlement Officer for necessary action. Settlement Officer, in turn, forwarded the same to Assistant Settlement Officer (in short ASO) for doing further needful in terms of decree passed by the Civil Court in the suit aforesaid.

7. It is on record that the name of Nidhi Rani Khullar was mutated in the relevant Records of Right as the legal owner of the plots of land aforesaid. After her death, her legal heirs who are respondents herein had also got their names mutated in place of said Nidhi Rani Khullar in the relevant Records of Right.

8. It has been contended that Assistant Settlement Officer by his order dated 27.05.1993 passed in Partition Case No. IP 3/1992-93 granted partition and made such partition effective from 1994. Such an order was said to have been passed under Regulation 116 of the Assam Land & Revenue Regulation, 1886 (in short, the Regulation, 1886).

9. It is alleged that concern Revenue Officer instead of performing the partition in letter and spirit of relevant law as well as the direction in the preliminary decree by putting the decree holder (s) in actual physical possession of the land, and, if necessary, by evicting the occupants, if any, from such land adopting coercive measure (s), only issued the order on 27.05.1993 showing granting of perfect permission. In that connection, our attention has been drawn to the provision of Section 116/116 A of the Regulation, 1886.

10. In the aforesaid circumstances, the respondents herein preferred an application u/s 151 of the Regulation of 1886 before the Assam Board of Revenue and prayed for giving effect to the partition in respect of land in question by handing over physical possession of the land to them as required under Rule 116/116 A of the Regulation. On the basis of such application case No. 46RA (DBR/06) was registered.

11. In such an appeal, a further prayer was made before the Assam Board of Revenue stating that land

Click Here to Read the rest of this document