Back
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
Sujat Uddin Choudhury S/o Late Mabarak Ali Choudhury – Appellant
Versus
Md. Ali Ahmed Barbhuiya S/o Late Kutub Ali Barbhuiya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J.
1. Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel representing the appellant as well as Mr. M.H. Rajbarbhuiyan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This is a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) whereby the judgment dated 29.06.2009 passed by the court of learned District Judge, Hailakandi in Title Appeal No. 33/2006, affirming the judgment and decree dated 20.09.2002 passed by the court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hailakandi in Title Suit No. 48/2000, is under challenge.
3. Kukicherra Tea Company sold 509 Bighas, 13 Kathas and 12 Chatak of land to Lt. Md. Hamid Raja Choudhury and five others. Registered sale deeds were executed and delivery of possession were also given. Hamid Raja Choudhury and five other buyers divided the land between themselves and since then, all of them have been enjoying the possession of the land.
4. After amicable division of land between themselves, Hamid Raja Choudhury got about 160 Bighas of land. Hamid Raja Choudhury had five sons and two daughters. The sons are- Lt. Abdul Jabbar Choudhury, Lt. Abdul Masabbir Choudhury, Lt. Mubarak Ali Choudhury, Md. Moin Uddin Ch
Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC reads as under Contents, date and signature of judgment
First appellate court judgment fail to comply with the provision of law as laid in Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such a judgment is not sustainable in law.
Point of Law : Appellate court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm the findings of the trial court. The first appeal is a valuable right of the parties and unless restricted by law, the whole case ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of compliance with the provisions of law as laid down in Order 41, Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the first appell....
A party's right to present evidence on ownership must be duly recognized; failure to address critical issues of fact leads to flawed judgments.
The failure of the Trial Court to adequately consider evidence and provide a reasoned judgment necessitates remand for fresh consideration, ensuring jurisdiction is correctly exercised and due proces....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
