Decided on July 20,1951

Saniram Kachari Appellant
Gauri Ram Koch Respondents


RAM LABHAYA, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judges LAD, by which the order of the Munsiff' of Gauhati decreeing plaintiff's claim was affirmed. Defendants have appealed.
(2.) PLAINTIFF 's case was that he purchased the property in suit on 9 -5 -1933 from Bhubal Ram Kachari, its owner. He got possession also of the property sold to him and claimed that he had' been in possession of the land since then. He further averred that he had obtained a mutation on the basis of the sale in his favour. Long after the sale on 4 -6 -1945, the first two defendants got the land mutated in their favour as heirs of Bhubal Kachari. He objected to the mutation in favour of the defendants but he did not succeed in getting the mutation corrected. He, therefore, sued for a declaration of title to the land and confirmation of his possession. It is worthy of note that in the plaint the plaintiff did not base his title on any sale deed. The contesting defendants denied that there was any sale in favour of the plaintiff. The factum of sale as distinct from its validity was thus brought into dispute. It appears that at the evidence stage, a sale deed was also produced. This was an unregistered document. It shows a sale of the land described therein to the plaintiff for Rs. 40/ -. It also appears that evidence was led about the execution of the sale deed though there was no reference to the sale deed in the pleadings of either party. The learned Munsiff found that the execution of the sale deed by the vendor Bhubal Kachari had been proved. He also found that plaintiff had been in possession of the property since the date of sale. He had also a mutation in his favour. On these findings, he decreed the claim.
(3.) THE learned Subordinate Judge agreed with these findings and dismissed the appeal.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.