Plaintiff proved ownership of contested land through valid sales despite challenges, underscoring importance of credible evidence in property disputes and limitations of revenue records as evidence.

JUDGMENT :

SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.

Factual Matrix

This appeal is preferred by the appellants Md. Mayar Uddin and Md Aftab Uddin. The respondents were initially Uday Shankar Das, Rabindra Chandra Das, Smt Jhunu Bala Das, Smt Shefali Rani Das, Smt Dipali Rani Das and the proforma respondents were initially Smt Pritibala Das, Smt Kusumanjali Das, Sri Nani Gopal Das who were arrayed as respondent Nos. 1 to 8 respectively. On death of respondent No. 1 Uday Sankar Das, he has been substituted by his following legal heirs;

Pritibala Das (sister) and

Smt Kusumanjali Das (sister) who were initially arrayed as proforma respondent Nos. 6 and 7 and on death of Smt Pritibala Das, she has been substituted by her legal heirs

Nihar Ranjan Das (son),

Nilashish Das (son), and

Rinku Rani Das (daughter)

2. On death of respondent No.4 Smt Shefali Rani Das, she has been substituted by her following legal years;

Sri Akhil Chandra Das,

Sri Prabendra Chandra Das,

Sri Paritosh Chandra Das,

Sri Alak Kanti Das,

Smt Sabita Rani Das

Smt Rati Rani Das

Smt Vijay Lakhi Das

The names of respondent No. 8 and his legal heirs have been struck off vide order of this court dated 04.03.2016. The names of respondent No.2, Sri Rabindra Chandra Das, has been stuck off vide order of this court dated 29.07.2015.

3. A title suit was initiated by Uday Sankar Das who was arrayed as respondent No.1 in this appeal which was registered as TS No.625/2006 against Md. Mayar Uddin and Md Aftab Uddin and other defendants. This suit was decreed on contest with costs vide order dated 06.12.2008. An appeal was preferred against this judgment and order by the present appellants Md. Mayar Uddin and Md Aftab Uddin which are registered as Title Appeal No.2/2009 and this appeal was dismissed vide order dated 08.02.2012.

4. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, the appellants Md. Mayar Uddin and Md Aftab Uddin are before this court, whereas the other defendants are not before this court. This second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

1. Whether the plaintiff could derive right, title and interest on the basis of Ext.- 2, i.e., the sale deed executed by Sucharu Bala Das when the plaintiff had failed to establish that she was a daughter of Nitya Charan Das?

2. Whether the learned lower appellate court was justified in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff on the basis of Ext.-1, Jamabandi?

5. The genesis of the case was that the respondent No.1 Uday Sankar Das brought up a title suit against the following defendants;

1.Md. Mayar Uddin,

2.Md Aftab Uddin,

3. Rabindra Chandra Das,

4. Smt Jhunu Bala Das,

5. Smt Shefali Rani Das,

6. Smt Dipali Rani Das

7.Smt Pritibala Das,

8. Smt Kusumanjali Das and

9. Sri Nani Gopal Das

Praying for (a) a decree declaring that the plaintiff and the proforma defendant Nos. 7 and 8 namely, Smt Pritibala Das and Smt Kusumanjali Das are the absolute owners of right, title and interest over the land described in schedule-1;

(b) a decree in the schedule-1 of the plaint and the structure thereon ;

(c) a decree declaring that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 namely, Md. Mayar Uddin and Md Aftab Uddin did not acquire any right, title and interest over the schedule-2 premises by way of purchase vide registered sale deed described in schedule-3 of the plaint;

(d) a decree for recovery of khas possession of the schedule-2 premises by evicting the defendant Nos. 1 and 2;

(e) a decree declaring the sale deed described in schedule-3 of the plaint;

(f) temporary and permanent injunction against the defendant Nos.1 and 2 restraining them from making any transfer in respect of schedule-3 premises