GAHC010117052024 2025:GAU-AS:8192 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : RSA/162/2010 MUSTT. MALEKJAN BEWA and 2 ORS W/O LATE TASUMUDDIN SK.

2: ON THE DEATH OF MD. KHATIMAMUD SK HIS LEGAL HEIR BULBULI BIBI WIFE

2II MINAR ALI SON 2III KHUSHIDA BEGUMDAUGHTER

3: ABUL SK S/O LATE JYOTI MAMUD SK. ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL. GHUNIMARI P.S. CHAPAR DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. VERSUS MD. KUMAR ALI and ORS S/O LATE TASADDI SK.

2:UMAR ALI S/O -DO-

3:MUSTT. JULEKHA BEWA W/O LATE KHOKAMAMUD SK.

4:MD. JOYNAL HOQUE 5:MD. MOINAL HOQUE

6:MOFIDUL HOQUE

7:MD. MOHIBUL HOQUE 8:MD. MONIRUL HOQUE SERIAL NO. 4 TO 8 ARE SONS OF LATE KHOKAMAMUD SK. ALL ARE R/O VILL. KAZIPARA PART-I P.S. CHAPAR DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. ------------

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. A. Biswas, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. R. Choudhury, Advocate Date of Hearing : 18.06.2025 Date of Judgment : 18.06.2025 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. A. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.

2. Ms. R. Choudhury, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2a to 2 g, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. She further submitted that she has instruction(s) to appear on behalf of the newly substituted respondent Nos. 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.

3. This is an appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, “the Code”) challenging the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2010 passed by the learned Court of the Civil Judge, Dhubri (hereinafter referred to as, “the learned First Appellate Court”) in Title Appeal No. 37/2005 whereby the appeal was dismissed thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2005 passed by the learned Court of the Civil Judge, (Junior Division) No. 1, Dhubri (hereinafter referred to as, “the learned Trial Court”) in Title Suit No. 307/1999.

4. It is seen that the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide an order dated 20.08.2010 admitted the instant appeal by formulating a substantial question of law which reads as under:

“1. Whether the Appellate Court misread the provisions of Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and if so, what will be its effect? “

5. The question arises before this Court, as to whether, the said substantial question of law so formulated by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court is involved in the present appeal.

6. For ascertaining the same, this Court briefly would like to take note of the facts which led to the filing of the present appeal.

7. The respondents herein, as plaintiffs had instituted a suit seeking various reliefs. Taking into account the substantial question of law so formulated by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court, this Court finds it apposite to reproduce the reliefs which have been sought for by the plaintiffs in the said suit herein below:

“a. A decree declaring the plaintiffs right, title, interest and possession in the land of Schedule-B.

b. A decree declaring that the defendant Nos. 1 to 12 had no right to sell the entire land of Khatian No. 59 and that the sale deeds Nos. 1228, 1229 of Dhubri Sub-registration Office, dated 4.6.97, executed in favour of the defendant Nos. 20, 21, 22 purporting to transfer the entire land of Khatian No.

58 are fraudulent illegal and not binding upon the plaintiffs.

c. A decree declaring that by virtue of the sale deeds Nos. 1228, 1229 and 1232, defendants Nos. 20, 21 and 22 have acquired no right, title and interest in the land of Schedule- B.

d. A decree declaring that the plaintiffs are entitled to get separate patta for the land of schedule-B in their names.

Alternately, A decree declaring that the plaintiffs are entitled to the partition of the land of schedule-A as per provision of the Assam Land Revenue Regulation on the basis of the share of the plaintiffs already affected and possessed by them.

e. A decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants their agents from dispossess