Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Kamrul Hossain Mollah

Civil Revision No.2914 of 2010

IN THE MATTER OF:

An application under Section 25 of the small causes Court Act

- AND -

IN THE MATTER OF:

Md. Motajid Billah @ Badsha and another ... Plaintiff-Petitioners

-Versus –

Md. Ishahaque Ali Farazi @ Md.Eshaque Farazi

. ..Opposite Party

Mr. Md. Omar Ali Khan, Advocate

….For the petitioners Mr. M.G. Mahmud (Shaheen), Advocate

…For the Opposite Party

Heard on 09.01.2024 and Judgment on 15.01.2024

Md. Kamrul Hossain Mollah, J:

On an application filed by the petitioner, under Section 25 of the small

causes Court Act, this Rule was issued calling upon the opposite party to show cause as to why the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2010(decree signed on 28.02.2010) passed by the learned Senior Assistant Judge, and Small Cause Court, Mymensingh in Small Cause Court Suit No.2 of 2004 dismissing the suit should not be set-aside and/or pass such other or further order or orders as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

Facts necessary for disposal of the Rule, in short, are that the plaintiff- petitioners filed S.C.C. Suit No.2 of 2004 before the Court of learned Senior Assistant Judge, Sadar, Mymensingh for eviction of tenant and recovery of arrear house rent amounting of Tk.14,000/-. Kechuram Ghosh @ Kechuram Gop was the owner of the suit premise. Kechuram died leaving two sons namely Joy Chandra Ghosh @ Joychandra Gop and Janma Joy Ghosh as his only heirs. While they were the owners the suit premise they entered into a contract of sale with the father and mother of the plaintiffs on 14.06.1963 and handed over the possession of the same to them. During the execution of the agreement of sale Janma Joy told the father of the plaintiff that he was in possession of the suit premise by amicable settlement with his brother. Father of the plaintiff was a government servant. He was a sanitary Inspector and served in several places of the Sylhet District. Father of the plaintiffs being government servant used to carry on trade in jute through brother Hafizuddin and thereafter, stationary business in the suit premise through his brother Hafizuddin for more than 12 years. Janmajoy Gop did not execute the safkabala deed in favour of the parents of the plaintiffs. Consequently, the parents of the plaintiffs instituted Other Class Suit No.116 of 1977 in the Court of the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Mymensingh.

The suit premise was let out to one Sree Prallad Chandra Sutradhar for annual rent of Tk.700/- on 01.01.1979 receiving advance rent for 02(two) years. After two years Prallad Chandra surrendered this suit premise to the plaintiffs. Thereafter, the plaintiffs let out the suit premise to the defendant a yearly rent of Tk.500/- only within the knowledge and presence of Jiban Chandra Mallik late Aftab Hossain, late Hafizuddin Md. abdur Rahman, Nurullah and others and the defendant paid the house rent of the suit premise to the plaintiffs on 01.06.1982 B.S. The defendant executed a rent receipt to the plaintiff No.1 by putting a joint signature on the rent receipt book by the plaintiff No.1 and the defendant. Thus the defendant paid house rent of the suit premise upto 1383B.S. Giving rent receipt to the plaintiffs in the aforesaid manner on the plea of paying house rent of the suit premise, the defendant did not pay the house rent of the suit premise upto 1384 B.S.

Thereafter, Joy Chandra Ghosh @ Joy Chandra Gop disclosed that his brother Janmajoy did not get share in the suit premise and he himself alone get share in the suit premise and he would sell his share in the suit premise. In the above circumstances the plaintiffs purchased the suit premise from Joychandra Ghosh on the 29th Agrahayan, 1384 B.S. without making any correspondence with their father Abdul Majid. Thereafter, plaintiff No.1 demanded house rent to the defendant, but the defendant did not pay the house rent of the suit premise, but told him that he purchased the suit premise from one Aktaru