Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
MITALI THAKURIA
On The Death Of Shri Amaresh Chandra Das, His Legal Heirs, Represented By- Sri Ripon Das – Appellant
Versus
On The Death Of Shri Munindra Chandra Das, His Legal Heirs, Represented By- Mrinal Kanti Das – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MITALI THAKURIA, J.
Heard Mr. M. J. Quadir, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. K. K. Bhattacharyya, learned Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5.
2. This is an appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment dated 09.05.2016 and decree dated 20.05.2016, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Karimganj in Title Appeal No. 13/2013, whereby the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff No. 2, Karimganj, dated 03.04.2013 in Title Suit No. 388/2006 was upheld.
3. This Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the appellants, admitted this appeal on the following substantial questions of law:-
1. Whether the findings of both the courts below that the registered sale deed Ext. 5 (Ext. A) was null and void is correct after holding that the respondent/ plaintiff be a tenant under the Assam Temporary Settled Areas Tenancy Act, 1971?
2. Any other substantial question of law that may be formulated at the time of hearing of this second appeal.
4. During the pendency of this appeal, some of the appellants as well as some of the responde
Tenancy rights established under the Assam (Temporarily Settled Areas) Tenancy Act, 1971 take precedence over invalid claims based on improper sale deeds.
Tenancy claims under the Assam Tenancy Act must adhere to statutory provisions, and civil courts have jurisdiction when administrative processes violate due diligence.
The courts upheld the plaintiff's occupancy rights over the disputed land, emphasizing the necessity of proper procedural adherence and the inadmissibility of unregistered documents for establishing ....
A second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure must involve substantial questions of law, and unregistered tenancy agreements cannot establish non-evictable rights.
Lease agreements do not confer ownership of land; independent evidence of ownership is required beyond mere entries in revenue records.
The court ruled that framing additional issues after arguments is lawful if it aids in resolving the matter, and failure to substantiate claims regarding tenancy rights led to dismissal of the appeal....
The court upheld the admissibility of historical tenancy documents under Section 90 of the Evidence Act, confirming the plaintiffs' rights over the land despite challenges regarding document validity....
The court affirmed that the protected tenant's rights under the Tenancy Act cannot be overridden by private agreements or settlements that do not comply with statutory requirements.
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
