Present:

Mr. Justice A.K.M. Asaduzzaman

Civil Revision No.1143 of 2019

Shamsun Nahar and others.

……………Petitioners.

-Versus-

Lil Chand and others.

………….Opposite parties.

Mr.Mohammad Aminul Islam, Adv.

……….For the petitioners.

Mr. Md. Shariful Islam, Adv.

.........For the Opposite parties.

Heard and Judgment on 28.02.2024. A.K.M.Asaduzzaman,J.

This Rule was issued calling upon the opposite parties to

show cause as to why the judgment and decree dated 13.03.2019 passed by the District Judge, Rajshahi in Title Appeal No. 231 of 2011 reversing those dated 16.05.2011 passed by the Assistant Judge, Puthia, Rajshahi in Other Class Suit No. 16 of 1996 dismissing the suit should not be set aside.

Opposite party as plaintiff filed Other Class Suit No. 16 of 1996 before the Court of Assistant Judge, Puthia, Rajshahi against the petitioners for declaration of title in the suit land in respect of 0.48 acres of land in schedule no. 1 and 0.98 acres of land in schedule no. 2.

Plaint case in short inter alia is that suit land was belonged to Govor Sardar, the grandfather of the plaintiff in respect of 2.56 acres, recorded in C.S. khatian no. 203 at Jama Rs. 8 anna 5 under the Superior Land Lord Naresh Narayan Roy as Sthitiban Rayati title and possessed the same and died leaving behind two sons and one daughter namely, Goni Sarder, Shukur Sardar and Rupjan Bibi and they possessed the same in ejmali by paying rents. Shukur Sardar and Rupjan transferred their shares vide kabala No. 1170 dated 31.06.1955 to the plaintiff Naimuddin Sardar, who possessed the 16 annas share as owner by cultivation and has been possessing the same till now. Defendants are uterian brothers and they collusively recorded the suit land during S.A. and R.S. operations in their names erroneously and the said records were not acted upon and they never got possession of the said land. Defendant No. 2 misused the power to record the suit land. S.A. and R.S. operation the land of lot no. 1 was recorded in the name of the defendant no. 1 and lot of No. 2 was recorded in the name of defendant no. 2, although the land being possessed by the plaintiff for more than 12 years and obtained title by adverse possession. Defendant No. 1 and his brother were inhabitants of village Jagirpara and the defendant no. 2 Kaifat Mondal was a village matbar and a clever man and a man of good communication with the official, the plaintiff used to pay the rents through him. During S.A. operation, the plaintiff entrusted Kaifat Mondal to record his name in S.A and R.S. operations and for the purpose he handed over the original registered deed to kaifat Mondal. Thereafter on demand, the said Kaifat Mondal on various pleas did not hand over the documents to the plaintiff and at one stage kaifat Mondal informed that he handed over all papers of the suit land to the defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff demanded to return those documents and approached to the defendant no. 1 but he did not hand over those documents on various pleas and lastly on 13.12.1995 refused to hand over those documents and disclosed that the suit land was recorded in the names of the defendants and claimed their title in the suit land. Plaintiff after collecting the copies of the C.S, S.A and R.S. khatians came to know for the first time that the suit land was recorded in S.A. and R.S. khatian in the name of the defendants. By those wrong record a cloud was cast in the title of the plaintiff of the suit land. As such he was constrained to file the suit.

Petitioner as defendant contested the suit by filing joint written statement denying the plaint case alleging, inter alia, that the suit land belonged to Govor Sardar as reyati tenant and was in possession in respect of 2.56 acres and CS. Khatian No. 203 was finally published in the name of Govor Sardar and during his possession the rent fell due and became incapable to pay the rent and returned to the office of the superior land lord. The superior land lord poss