Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Kamrul Hossain Mollah

Civil Revision No. 834 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

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

- AND -

IN THE MATTER OF:

Abdul Hai Mollah

.....Respondent-Petitioner

-Versus -

Md. Syed Miah @ Kamal Miah

..... Appellant-Opposite Parties Mr. Diponkar Debnath, Advocate

..... for the petitioner No one appears

..... For the Opposite Parties

Heard on 18.10.2023 and Judgment on 19.10.2023

Md. Kamrul Hossain Mollah, J:

On an application filed by the petitioner, under Section 115(1) of the

Code of Civil Procedure, this Rule was issued calling upon the opposite party No.1 to show cause as to why the impugned judgment and order dated 21.11.2016 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Brahmanbaria in allowing the Miscellaneous Appeal No. 69 of 2010 and reversing the judgment and order dated 17.08.2010 passed by the learned

Senior Assistant Judge, Kosba, Brahmanbaria in Miscellaneous (Pre- emption) Case No. 12 of 2006 should not be set-aside and/or pass such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

At the time of issuance of the Rule this Court stayed the operation of the impugned judgment and order dated 21.11.2016 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Brahmanbaria in allowing the Miscellaneous Appeal No. 69 of 2010 and reversing the judgment and order dated 17.08.2010 passed by the learned Senior Assistant Judge, Kosba, Brahmanbaria in Miscellaneous (Pre-emption) Case No. 12 of 2006 for a period of 06 (six) months from date.

Facts necessary for disposal of the Rule, in short, are that out of 90 decimals of land in Dag No. 675 one Ayet Ali purchased 60 decimals land and rest 30 decimals land purchased Fande Ali, Ali Ahmed, Ali Azam, Abdur Rahman, Ali Akbar and Abul Hashem and they all are enjoying the title and possession, of the said land and ROR record was prepared under Khatian No. 132, thereafter, Fande Ali died leaving 2 sons, Ali Ahmed died leaving 2 sons, 1 daughter and 1 wife and they are enjoying the possession and title, over the said land and they sold the suit land to the opposite party No. 1 and handed over the possession and he is the owner of 15 decimal land by inheritance in Dag No. 375 and enjoying the possession and title,of the said land and during enjoying the privilege on the suit land the opposite party No. 1 on 21.04.2003 went to Dubai and after staying a certain period the opposite party No. 1 arrived at home on 18.02.2006 and on 05.06.2006 the preemptor opposite party No. 1 saw the petitioner on the suit land for clearing grass, thereafter he asked to the petitioner about the suit land and he disclosed that he purchase suit land.

Thereafter, he took the certified copy of the said deed on 06.06.2006 and filed the suit for preemption on 05.07.2006.

The purchaser pre-emptee contested the suit by filing written objection denying the material allegation of the plaint and contended inter alia that he is a farmer and he is the owner of 115 decimals of land adjacent to Dag No. 674 at the northern side of the suit land and enjoying the possession and title of that land more than 12 years and the vendor opposite party No. 2 sold the land on 09.11.2004 to the instant petitioner vide deed No. 4638 and handed over the possession and due to requirement of money opposite party No. 2 in presence of Jitu Mia and Ayes Mia proposed to sell the suit land to his 2 brothers namely Ronu Mia and Fazu Mia, but both of them denied to purchased and the petitioner purchase the suit land with every hardship and the opposite party departed to abroad and become solvent, in the meantime, the value of the suit land increased, so, the opposite party filed the suit for preemption.

After hearing both the parties the learned Senior Assistant Judge, Kosba, Brahmanbaria discharged the Miscellaneous (Preemption) Case No.12 of 2006 by his judgment and order dated 17.08.2010 on the ground that the suit is