Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Salim

CIVIL REVISION NO.143 OF 2010.

Executive Engineer, Roads and High Ways, Brahmanbaria.

-------------Plaintiff-Petitioner.

-VERSUS-

Abdul Motalib and others

------------Defendant-Opposite Parties.

Mr. Waliul Islam Oli, D.A.G. with

Mr. Mohammed Shaif Uddin Raton, AAG. Mr. Md. Nazrul Islam Choton, A.A.G.

Mr. Md. Nasimul Hasan, A.A.G.

.............. For the Petitioner.

Mr. Partha Sharathi Ray, Advocate

....... For the Opposite Party Nos.1-6.

Heard on 28.10.2024, 29.10.2024 and 30.10.2024.

Judgment on 06.11.2024.

By this Rule, the opposite parties were called upon to show cause as to why the impugned judgment and decree dated 21.01.2009 passed by learned District Judge, Brahmanbaria in Title Appeal No.30 of 2008 allowing the appeal and reversing the judgment and decree dated 03.08.2008 passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Sadar, Brahmanbaria in Title Suit No.160 of 2007 decreeing 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.

The petitioner as plaintiff instituted Title Suit No.160 of 2007 before the Assistant Judge, Sadar, Brahmanbaria, against the defendant-opposite parties for the declaration of title with a recovery of Khas possession and the judgment and decree dated 17/11/1998 passes in Title Suit No.107 of 1998 was not binding upon him contending inter-alia that 0.64 acres of land of C.S. Plot No.113 of C.S. Khatian No.205 was acquired by L A Case No.1/51-52 for the then comminication and Building Department by paying compensation to its original owner in full; that S.A. Khatian of the property was rightly recorded in its name; subsequently Roads and High Ways Department of the government under the Ministry of Communication became its owner and R.S. Khatian No.315 was recorded in the name of C & B and D.P. Khatian No.2 has been prepared in the name of Roads and High Ways; that the defendants in september,2003 erected shops in the suit land illegally and when the plaintiff them to remove the same they refused to do so; that on 24.02.2007 when the joint forces went to recover the suit land the defendants showed papers of the decree of Title Suit No.107 of 1998 and claimed title over the same; that the plaintiff took certified copy of the judgment and decree of the said Title Suit No.107 of 1998 and came to know that the defendants upon

committing fraud on the court by suppressing summons upon the defendant obtained the said collusive decree and hence the suit.

The opposite party Nos.1-6 and opposite party No.15 as defendant Nos.1-7 contested the said suit by filing written statements denying all the materials averments of the plaint contending, inter-alia, that one Madari was the C. S. record tenant of the suit property; that Madari died leaving behind his son Safar Ali and Safar ali died leaving behind his three sons Kafiluddin, Mafiluddin, and Seraj Ali; that Kafiluddin Mafiluddin and Seraj Ali sold 15 acres of land to Bazlur Rahman. Titas Gas Company got said 15 acres of land vide LA Case No.14(27) of 1979-80, defendant No.1 and the predecessor of defendant Nos.2-7 purchased 27 acres of suit land by two registered kabala dated 04.06.1964 and 20.11.1967 from the successor of original owners; that the S.A. Khatian of the suit property has wrongly been recorded in the name of C & B for which these defendants filed Title Suit No.141 of 1996 subsequently, renumbered as Title Suit No.107 /19 98 before the Assistant Judge, Brahmanbaria, and the suit has been decreed ex parte after serving proper notice upon the present plaintiff. The plaintiff has no right, title, or possession of the suit land, and the suit is liable to be dismissed with cost.

During the trial, the learned Assistant Judge, Sadar, Brahmanbaria, framed five issues.

The plaintiff-petitioner examined 1(one) witness and produced documents marked as exhibits Nos.1-6 to pro