THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA

Review Petn No. 9 of 2014

IN CRP No. 28 of 2013

1. Mrs. Venetta Kharsyntiew,

R/o Lachumiere, Shillong – 793 001,

East Khasi Hills District,

Meghalaya.

2. Shri Shree Prakash Mahanta,

S/o (L) D. Mahanta, R/o Lachumiere,Shillong – 793 001,

East Khasi Hills District,

Meghalaya.

..Review Petitioners

-Versus-

1. Shri Tushar Nath Bhattacharjee,

S/o Late Aghor Nath Bhattacharjee,

Resident of Sola Para, Paltan Bazar,

Guwahati, Assam.

2. Smti Sujata Bezbaruah,

D/o Late Aghor Nath Bhattacharjee,

R/o Solapara Road,

Manipuri Basti, Guwahati.

3. Smti Sabita Goswami,

D/o (L) Aghor Nath Bhattacharjee,

R/o Goswami Enclave,

Gandhibasti, Guwahati -7.

… Respondents

-BEFORE-

HON?BLE MR JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH,

CHIEF JUSTICE

HON?BLE MR JUSTICE T NANDAKUMAR SINGH

& HON?BLE MR JUSTICE SR SEN

Advocate for the Petitioners

:Mr HS Thangkhiew, Sr. Adv,

& Mr SP Mahanta, Sr. Adv.

Advocate for the respondents : Mr BK Singh,

2

Mr N Bharali,

Ms OAI Bang, Advocates

Date of Judgment

: 10.09.2015

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

Uma Nath Singh, CJ,

This review petition has been filed against the judgment

and order dated 23.06.2014 passed in CR(P) No. 28 of 2013 by the

then Hon?ble the Chief Justice whereby the Court has declined to

interfere with the order passed by the appellate court. The Court

has also discussed the judgments rendered in the case of (i)

Shrimant Shamrao Suryavanshi and another v. Pralhad

Bhairoba Suryavanshi and others (2002) 3 SCC 676; (ii)

Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani (2003) 7 SCC 350;

(iii) Narendra Singh and others v. Jai Bhagwan and others

(2005) 9 SCC 157; and (iv) Alok Bose v. Pramatma Devi and

others (2009) 2 SCC 582.

2.

It appears that the land in question measuring 19,585

sq ft (Numbered as Plot No, 80 in Patta No. 58) situated at

Lachumiere, Shillong, had been acquired by the father of the

respondents (Late) Aghor Nath Bhattacharjee, the predecessor-in-

title from the then Assam Govt. (now Govt. of Meghalaya) on

13.04.1967. He enjoyed the possession with all the legal rights and

title in, with complete dominion over the property till he died on

19.03.1984. After his death, the property devolved upon his legal

heirs, namely, Sabitri Bhattacharjee (Widow), Tushar Nath

Bhattacharjee, plaintiff No.1, (son/respondent No.1 herein), Binoy

3

Nath Bhattacharjee (Son/since died), Smti Sujata Bezbaruah,

plaintiff No. 2 (daughter/respondent No. 2) and Smti Sabita

Goswami, plaintiff No.3 (daughter/respondent No. 3). Thus, Tushar

Nath Bhattacharjee, plaintiff/respondent No. 1, his mother, Smti

Sabitri Bhattacharjee, and brother, Shri Binoy Nath Bhattacharjee,

applied for mutation. The Extra Assistant Commissioner (Revenue),

Shillong in mutation case No. 15 of 1991, vide order dated

20.03.1991 recorded their names. Thereafter, Smti Sabitri

Bhattacharjee, mother of the plaintiffs/respondents died in the year

1994 and Shri Binoy Nath Bhattacharjee, brother of respondents,

who was a bachelor passed away in the year 1998. As per pleadings

in case records, defendant/review petitioner No. 1, namely, Smti

Venetta Kharsyntiew and her husband, defendant/review petitioner

No.2 Shri SP Mahanta allegedly got a forged sale deed dated 28-11-

1991 claiming to have been executed by Shri Tushar Nath

Bhattacharjee, plaintiff No.1, his brother, Binoy Nath Bhattacharjee

and his mother, Sabitri Bhattacharjee, in respect of vacant piece of

land measuring 5300 sqft out of 19,585 sqft, mutated in their

names after the death of their father (Late) Aghor Nath

Bhattacharjee. It also appears from the allegations in the pleadings

that the defendants/review petitioners forcibly dispossessed the

plaintiffs/respondents and their mother and brother from 5300 sqft

of land being the subject matter of sale deed dated 28.11.1991.

T