Point of Law: It is also relevant to take note of word “compulsory” used in Section 32A which is legislative mandate clearly indicating mandatory nature in which document is proved to be registration.

ORDER :

Heard Mr. PJ Saikia, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. AK Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. C Goswami, the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This revision under Section 115 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 24.04.2015 passed in Title Appeal No.08/2014 whereby the said appeal was dismissed thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated 07.06.2014 passed by the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Jorhat in Title Suit No.52/2012.

3. At the outset, it is relevant to take note of that the perusal of the plaint shows that the suit filed by the plaintiff was a suit seeking declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit premises; for declaration that the defendant is a defaulter in respect of the suit premises; for declaration that the construction undertaken by the defendant in the suit property is illegal and unauthorized; for declaration that the Sale Deed No.823/1173 dated 03.05.2007 of Sub-Registry office, Jorhat is not in respect to the suit property and was not executed by the husband of the plaintiff No.1 Late (Dr) Shah Alom and is not binding upon the plaintiffs and the Sale Deed does not convey any right, title and interest over the suit property to the defendant; for recovery of arrear rent of Rs.16,000/-from the defendant; for eviction of the defendant from the suit property; for compensation @ Rs.2000/-from the date of filing of the suit till recovery of khas and vacant possession by the plaintiff; for permanent injunction; for mandatory injunction and other reliefs. Therefore, upon the perusal of the plaint of the suit and the relief sought for, it would be seen that it is not only a suit for eviction of the defendant but it is also a suit wherein the right title and interest have been claimed in respect to the suit property as well as for declaration that the sale deed upon which the defendant claims right over the suit property be declared as not binding upon the plaintiffs and the defendant does not have any right title and interest on the suit property. The said suit was apparently decreed by the trial Court whereby the plaintiffs right title and interest over the suit land was declared and further holding that the plaintiffs were the absolute owners of the suit premises. The trial further vide the judgment and decree dated 07.06.2015 declared that the registered sale deed bearing No.823/1173 dated 03.05.2007 was void and not binding upon the plaintiff and the sale deed does not confer any right, title and interest upon the defendant and the defendant is a defaulter. It was also held that the defendant is liable to be evicted from the suit premises and the plaintiffs are entitled to arrear rent from the defendant from the month of January, 2012 and also for compensation @2,000/-per month till recovery of khas and vacant possession of the suit land and the premises. Further to that, the plaintiffs were also held entitled to be put in khas and vacant possession of the suit land and the premises in due course of law and the defendants were injuncted from disturbing the peaceful possession of the suit land of the plaintiffs.

4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 07.06.2014 passed in Title Suit No.52/2012, the defendant as appellant preferred an appeal which was before the Court of the Additional District Judge at Jorhat and registered and numbered as Title Appeal No.08/2014. The First Appellate Court vide the judgment and order dated 24.04.2015 dismissed the appeal thereby upholding the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Being aggrieved, the instant proceedings have been initiated under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.05.2015 passed in Title Appeal No.08/2014.

5. This Court vide an order dated 21.08.2015 had admitted the instant petition and have called for the records and stayed the eviction decree dated 07.06.2014 passed by the learned Civil Judge