JUDGMENT :

Arindam Lodh, J.

1. The impugnment in this first appeal is the judgment and decree dated 17.08.2017 rendered by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No. 1, West Tripura, Agartala in Title Suit 35 of 2014 wherein the suit of the appellant-plaintiff has been dismissed.

2. I have heard Mr. A. Sengupta, leaned counsel appearing for the appellant-plaintiff (here-in-after referred to as the plaintiff) and Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. As the rival assertions are integrated in the pleading, a brief reference thereto is indispensible. The plaintiff instituted suit No. 35 of 2014 under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 against the respondents seeking declaration that the sale deed bearing No. 1-3049, dated 04.04.2014 is invalid, nonest, illegal and not binding upon the plaintiff and a suit for Specific Performance of Contract and also for perpetual injunction. He claimed that he had been possessing the suit land as a tenant under the original landlord, Paresh Chandra Saha, who had expired on 03.10.2008 leaving behind his wife and two sons who were impleaded as defen