IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION

(CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION)

Present:

Mr. Justice S M Kuddus Zaman

CIVIL REVISION NO. 4378 OF 2018

In the matter of:

An application under Section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

And

Md. Babu Sheikh and others

... Petitioners

-Versus-

Md. Ramjan Kha and others

... Opposite parties

Md. Ekramul Islam, Advocate

.... For the petitioners.

Mr. Md. Sanower Hossain, Advocate

…. For the opposite party Nos.1-5. Heard on 27.08.2024 and Judgment on 29.08.2024.

This Rule was issued calling upon the opposite party Nos.1-5 to show cause as to why the judgment and decree dated 04.10.2018 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rajbari in Title Appeal No.103 of 2015 disallowing the appeal and thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated 31.08.2015 passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Baliakandi, Rajbari, in Title Suit No.25 of 2015 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.

Facts in short are that the opposite parties as plaintiffs instituted above suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession in disputed 90 link land by eviction of ghar of the defendants.

It was alleged that 4 decimal land appertaining to plot No.3081 of S.A. Khatian No.1 belonged to the Government of Bangladesh. Plaintif No.1 and now deceased Sakina Bibi as landless peasants obtained perpetual lease for 90 years of above land by a registered kabulated dated 25.09.2005 from the Government and they mutated their names paid rent to the Government. On 7th Falgun 1413 B.S. defendants forcibly erected a corroborated tin Ghar in the disputed land. On 10th Magh 1415 B.S. defendants denied to remove above Ghar and hand over vacant possession to the plaintiffs.

Defendant Nos.1-5 contested the suit by filing a joint written statement wherein they have stated that defendant No.1 purchased the land of undisputed R.S. plot No.2847 in 1983 and constructed his dwelling house in above land and also erected a shop. He transferred above land to his wife Sakina Begum by deed of Heba-bil-awas dated 17.04.2000 and after the demise of Sakina Bibi defendant No.2-5 are in possession in above dwelling house as her heirs.

The disputed land claimed by the plaintiffs are vague and indefinite and the same cannot be determined without survey by an Advocate Commissioner. The plaintiffs did not get physical possession in the land they obtained by settlement from the Government. Defendants are in possession in the disputed land long before taking of settlement of the plaintiffs.

At trial plaintiffs and defendants examined 3 witnesses each. Document produced and proved by the plaintiffs were marked as Exhibit No.1-6 and those of the defendants were marked as Exhibit Nos.Ka - Kha.

Defendant No.7, Government of Bangladesh represented by the Deputy Commissioner contested filed a separate written statement wherein they have supported the case of the plaintiff and stated that 4 decimals land of disputed plot No.3081 belonged to the government and the same was given settlement to landless peasant plaintiff No.1 and his wife Sakina Khatun. They have mutated their names in respect of above land and paid rent until 1415 B.S. Above leases were given formal possession of the above land. Defendant Nos.1-5 are unlawfully

1

occupying 1 2 decimal land and they have no lawful title and

possession in the above land.

Defendant Nos.7 examined 1 witness and document produced and proved documents which were marked as Exhibit Nos.Ka – Kha.

On consideration of facts and circumstances of the case and evidence on record the learned Assistant Judge decreed the suit.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree of the trial Court defendants preferred Other Class Appeal No.503 of 2009 to the District Judge, Rajbari which wa