Present:

MR. JUSTICE S.M. EMDADUL HOQUE CIVIL REVISION NO. 246 OF 2019.

IN THE MATTER OF:

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

- AND -

IN THE MATTER OF:

Omar Faruk and others.

….Plaintiff-appellant-petitioners.

-Versus – Government of Bangladesh and others.

….Defendant- respondent-opposite parties. Mr. Moteen Uddin Anwar, Advocate, with

Mr. Ali Akbar Rigan, Advocate

….. For the petitioners.

Mr. Md. Shahidul Islam, Advocate

….. For opposite parties.

Heard on: 14.01.2024, 15.01.2024 and Judgment on 29.01.2024. On an application of the petitioners Omar Faruk and others under

section 115 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure the Rule was issued calling upon the opposite party Nos. 1 and 8 to show cause as to why the impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.2018 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 1st Court, Cox’s Bazar, in Other Appeal No. 124 of 2015 disallowing the application for amendment of the plaint and for recalling the P.W.1 and rejecting the application for cancelling the local investigation report filed by the appellant petitioners should not be set aside and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to this court may seem fit and proper.

Facts necessary for disposal of the Rule, in short, is that the plaintiff instituted Title Suit No. 15 of 2005 renumbered as Other Class Suit No. 2036 of 2014 before the Assistant Judge, Kutubdia, Cox’s Bazar for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and for a decree of permanent injunction in respect of the schedule land of the plaint.

The suit was contested by the defendants by filing written statements denying all the material assertion of the plaint.

The trial court after hearing the parties and considering the evidence on record dismissed the suit by its judgment and decree dated 12.08.2015.

Against the said judgment and decree of the trial court the plaintiff petitioners preferred Other Class Appeal No. 124 of 2015 before the learned District Judge, Cox’s Bazar. The appeal was sent to the learned Joint District Judge, 1st Court, Cox’s Bazar for disposal.

During the pendency of the appeal the defendant respondent opposite parties filed an application for local investigation. The said application was allowed on 22.07.2018 and an Advocate commission was appointed.

Thereafter the petitioners filed three applications; one is for recalling the order of appointment of Advocate Commission dated 22.07.2018, the another application for amendment of the plaint under order VI Rule 17 read with section 151 of the code civil procedure and another application for recalling the P.W.1.

The appellate court after hearing the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case rejecting all the applications by its judgment and order dated 27.11.2018.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of the appellate court the plaintiff petitioners filed this revisional application under Section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and obtained the Rule.

At the time of hearing of the Rule the learned Advocate of the petitioners filed supplementary affidavit annexing some material documents which are on record though the record is also available before this court.

Mr. Md. Shahidul Islam, the learned Advocate enter appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.5 through vokalatnama to oppose the Rule and Mr. Abu Naser Swapon, the learned Assistant Attorney General represented on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 1-4.

Mr. Moteen Uddin Anwar, the learned Advocate along with Mr. Ali Akbar Rigan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners filed an application for amendment of the plaint as well as recalling the P.W.1 to adduce some documents and to prove the same as per amendment.

He submits that at the trial stage the defendant side sought for local