Suman Shyam, J. (Oral) –

This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.07.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Judge) No.2, Guwahati in Title Appeal No.64/2002 allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 2, Guwahati in Title Suit No.93/1997.

2. The plaintiff/appellant's case in brief is that he had purchased the suit land measuring 2 kathas from its registered owner by means of registered deed of sale bearing No.5776/1968 and thereafter got delivery of possession of the purchased land. Subsequently, the name of the plaintiff had also been mutated in the revenue records in respect of the said plot of land. However, since the plaintiff had to remain away from the suit land in connection with his service, the defendants, being the legal heirs of vendor, forcibly entered the suit land in the year 1989 and refused to vacate the said land. On several occasions, the plaintiff had requested the defendants to vacate the suit land and even served notices upon the defendants but to no availed. Such being the position, the plaintiff was compelled to institute the Title Suit No.93/1997 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Gauhati, praying for a decree declaring his right, title and interest over the suit land and also for recovery of khas possession by evicting the defendants therefrom.

3. The defendants/respondents contested the suit by filing written statement. The case of the defendants, projected in the written statement, is that at no point of time late Balen Chandra Das i.e., the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants had sold the suit land to the plaintiff. They also denied that the possession of the suit land was never delivered to the plaintiff. According to the defendants, late Balen Chandra Das, during his life time, had constructed a thatched house on the suit land and had been living therein with his family until his death. After the death of Balen Chandra Das, the defendants removed the thatched house and constructed an Assam type house over the suit land. The defendants also questioned the maintainability of the suit on the ground of limitation, improper valuation of the suit and deficit Court fee. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned trial Court framed as many as 9 issues which are as follows:-

"(1) Whether the suit is maintainable in its present form and circumstances?

(2) Whether there is any cause of action?

(3) Whether the suit is barred by limitation?

(4) Whether the suit property is properly valued and prayer court fee is paid on the valuation of the suit land and separate fixed court fee for declaration?

(5) Whether the sale deed No.5776 of 1968 has been executed by Lt. Balen Ch. Das?

(6) Whether the sale deed No.5776 of 1968 is forged, false and fabricated?

(7) Whether the plaintiff has right, title and interest over the suit land?

(8) Whether the plaintiff was in possession of the suit land and entitled to khas possession of the suit land?

(9) What relief/or reliefs the parties are entitled under the law and equity?"

4. The plaintiff side adduced evidence by examining 3 (three) witnesses viz, PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, besides producing documentary evidences in support of his case. The defendant's side had also examined witnesses besides adducing documentary evidences. Upon considering the materials on record, the learned Trial Court decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff by answering all the issues in favour of the plaintiff by the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2002.

5. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2002 passed in Title Suit No.93/1997, the defendants as appellants preferred Title Appeal No.64/2002 before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Guwahati. The learned First Appellate Court upon hearing the parties and examining the materials on record categorically recorded the findings that the plaintiff has been able to prove the registered dee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document