Back
ROBIN PHUKAN
On The Death Of Jharna Das @ Jhunu Das Her Legal Heir Bappi Ranjan Das (Son) – Appellant
Versus
Sanjib Barman, S/o. Jugen Barman – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Robin Phukan, J.)
Heard Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. A.C. Sharma, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. G. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This second appeal, under Section 100 of the CPC, is directed against the judgment dated 29.01.2015 and decree dated 13.02.2015, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Dhubri, in Title Appeal No. 33/2007.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment dated 29.01.2015 and decree dated 13.02.2015, the learned Civil Judge, Dhubri had upheld the judgment and decree dated 23.05.2007, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Dhubri, in Title Suit No. 313/2001.
4. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are briefly stated as under:
The court upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in second appeals under Section 100 CPC.
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
There can be appointment of Amin Commission even at appellate stage.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Commissioner appointed under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC cannot give a finding regarding possession of a property and the court should not rely so....
The court held that a title deed must be substantiated with clear evidence, and the Survey Commissioner's findings are critical in resolving land disputes.
The Appellate Court must consider the Trial Court's reasoning and evidence when reversing a decree, as mandated by Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC.
The court clarified that reliance on an unchallenged Commissioner's report for title determination is improper without accurate property measurement, and limitation for recovery of possession involve....
Point of Law : Merely giving suggestions and not adducing any evidence to substantiate the same, cannot entitle the plaintiff to a decree as prayed for.
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
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
