The court emphasized the importance of consistent pleadings, analyzed the consequential relief of recovery of possession, and considered the issue of limitation based on the 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding and mutation entry.

1. Heard Mr. P. Baruah, learned counsel, appearing for the appellants/defendants and Ms. P. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff No. 1.

2. This second appeal is against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first appellate court in Title Appeal No. 28/2013 by the learned court of Civil Judge at Jorhat.

3. The present appellants are the defendants in T.S. No. 75/1995 [T. S. No. 92/06 (Old) and T.S. No. 51/07 (New)], preferred by the respondent No. 1. It is the case of the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 that he is the absolute owner of the suit property by virtue of being the son of late Ghanakanta Rajkumar, the original Pattadar No. 2. The defendants were the permissive occupiers of the said suit property till the year 1963 when they vacated the same and handed over it to the plaintiff. The suit property was occupied by the Assam Homeopathic College, Jorhat for a period of 9 years with effect from 1978 till December, 1986. The said college also left vacating the suit property and since then the respondent/plaintiff No. 1 was in possession of the same. One Nobin Chandra Buragohain in his capacity as the President of the Indian National Congress, Jorhat Unit initiated a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. against the plaintiff/respondent No. 1, which was dropped on 3.1.1990 by the order of the learned trial Magistrate.

4. It is also pleaded that on the strength of the mutation order dated 4.9.1969, the defendants/appellants mutated their names in the Mutation Case No. 533/1966-67. On 22.8.1994, a news item was published in the Dainik Janambhumi wherein it was reported that a Mental Hospital was to be set up on the suit property and the defendant/appellant No. 6 had already taken over charge of the said suit property and the same was objected by the plaintiff/respondent but the defendant No. 7 vide notice dated 3.10.1994 addressed the father of the respondent/plaintiff that the suit property standing in the name of the defendants/appellants would be measured on 6.10.1994. Against the said objection from the plaintiffs, the defendants forcibly ousted the respondent/plaintiff from the suit property and occupied the same.

5. Being aggrieved, the present suit was filed for declaration of his title over the suit property, recovery of khas possession, cancellation of mutation and for permanent injunction.

6. The defendants/appellants through their written statement, denied about the permissive occupation. It is the defence that since 1934 they are in occupation and their names already mutated which was never challenged by the respondent/plaintiff because of which the suit is barred by the law of Limitation. It is also denied that the Homeopathic College, Jorhat was ever in occupation of the suit property. It is the contention of the defendants/appellants that the father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi during his visit to Jorhat on 18.4.1934 had laid the foundation stone of the Hatibarua Smriti Bhawan ( which is also known as “Rohini Hatibharua Smriti Bhawan”) over the suit land being preceded by the inauguration of the Public Naamghar in the contiguous land. Hatibarua Smriti Bhawan was constructed in 1935 and Pandit Jaharwal Nehru inaugurated it and the office of the Congress Party was being run in the said Bhawan.

7. In the year, 1972-73, the former Member of Parliament, Late Bijoy Krishna Handique, who became the President of the Jorhat Congress Committee shifted the office of the Congress Party to its present place at A.T. Road, Jorhat and the Rohini Hatibarua Smriti Bhawan was used as the office of the Congress Seva Dal besides running of other activities of the Congress Party in the said Bhawan. In the year 1978-79 the said Rohini Hatibarua Bhawan was temporarily permitted by the Congress Party to be occupied by the Homeopathic College and since then after construction of the building of the said College at Jorhat, the said Rohini Hatibarua Bhawan was vacated and the possess