ORDER

22.11.2024 Heard Mr. D. Deka, learned counsel for the applicants.

2. In this petition, under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C., the applicants have prayed for restraining the respondents from dispossessing the applicants from the Schedule A - G land and restraining the respondents from carrying any activity or constructions over the Schedule - H & I land and restraining from digging any fishery or excavating soil from the Schedule - H & I land or taking any APDCL electricity connection in the temporary structure made in Schedule - H & I land and also restraining the respondents from changing the nature, feature, character and topography of the Schedule - H & I land during the pendency of the instant revision petition.

3. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants as plaintiffs filed an application under Section 8(2) of the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010 before the learned Special Tribunal for declaration of the right, title & interest in respect of Schedule A – I land, situated at Bor Radha Ati Kissam, under Alitangoni mouza, Nagaon; and for delivery of khas possession of the land as described in the Schedule H & I, situated at Bor Radha Ati Kissam under Alitangoni mouza, Nagaon; confirmation of possession of the Schedule A – G land, situated at Bor Radha Ati Kissam, under Alitangoni mouza, Nagaon;

and to grant permanent injunction along with monetary relief etc.

3.1. Mr. Deka further submits that along with the said application, the applicants have filed a petition under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. read with Section 8(2) of the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010, wherein the learned Tribunal granted ad-interim temporary injunction and issued notice to the respondents. Thereafter, the respondents have entered appearance and filed written objection. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal, hearing learned counsel for both the parties, had dismissed the application on the ground that the applicants had failed to prove that they have a prima-facie case and that the balance of convenience is on their side and that they are likely to suffer irreparable loss in the event of refusing injunction. Mr. Deka further submits that the learned Tribunal while appreciating the materials placed on record came to an erroneous finding that the applicants does not have mutation over the Schedule - H & I land and the aforesaid impugned order was passed on the basis of the Serial No. "Unga" at Column No. 10, under the heading of remarks of the Jamabandi of Patta No. 6 and Dag No. 33, in which the learned Tribunal found that the land covered by the Dag No. 33 of the Patta No. 6 were already mutated in the name of Md. Saheruddin (Respondent No. 5, who is the father of respondent Nos. 6, 7 & 8) and Md. Afazuddin (since deceased, who is the father of respondent Nos. 1 – 4)

as per order dated 19.10.2013, of the concerned Circle Officer.

3.2. Mr. Deka further submits that a bare perusal of the said Serial No. "Unga" at Column No. 10 under the heading of "remarks" of the Jamabandi of Patta No. 6 and Dag No. 37 transpires that the aforesaid findings by the learned tribunal is completely wrong, the said column reflects that "as per order dated 07.12.86, land measuring 2 Kathas 10 Lessas covered by Dag No. 37 is mutated in the name of Ramjan in place of A. Salam by way of sale, the name of A. Samad (father of appellant No. 5), A. Zabbar (appellant No. 1) and A. Mutalib (appellant No. 2) by way of sale as per order dated 07.12.1986, of the Citha". From this it transpires that the learned Tribunal overlooked the genuine grievance of the applicants.

3.3. Mr. Deka further submits that the applicants were dispossessed of the lands mentioned in the Schedule H & I, which were mutated in the name of the applicants long back and the same is reflected in the Jamabandi of the Patta No. 6, wherein Serail No. "Ga" at Column No. 10 under the heading of "Remarks" as per orde