SITESH CHANDRA CHOUDHURY Vs. POZIRUDDIN AHMED AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Sitesh Chandra Choudhury
Poziruddin Ahmed And Others
Click here to view full judgement.
Baharul Islam, J. -
(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge, Upper Assam Districts at Dibrugarh in Title Suit No. 5 of 1962.
(2.) THE plaintiffs case, briefly, is that late Delaluddin Ahmed was the owner of 269B, 3K, 9 Lessas of land covered by dag No. 8 of N. L. R. Grant No. 46 at Moran. On June 1, 1948 Delaluddin made a gift of 4 bighas of the said land to defendants Nos. 19 to 21, who accepted the gift and came to possession. On November 24, 1950, defendants 19 to 21 sold the aforesaid 4 bighas of land (which will hereinafter be called 'the suit land') to the plaintiff by a registered sale deed and delivered possession. The plaintiff who was a Government servant, had to be away from the land. Taking advantage of his absence, defendant No. 14 began to construct a house on the suit land, whereupon, on enquiry, the plaintiff came to learn that defendant No. 1, who was the son of Delaluddin, had sold the suit land to defendant No. 14. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit before the Munsiff for declaration of his title and possession of the suit land, but the plaint was returned on the ground that he had no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit. The plaintiff, therefore, has filed the instant suit before the Sub -Judge for declaration of his title to the suit land, for partition and khas possession end also prayed for an injunction. Only defendant No. 1 has filed a written statement and contested the suit. He has denied the alleged gift by his father and has averred that the sale of the suit land to the plaintiff was invalid, that the suit was barred by limitation and that it was bad for non -joinder of parties. He has denied that there had been any delivery of possession of the suit land by his father to the alleged donees and has averred that he is in continuous possession of the suit land since after his father's death. He has claimed compensatory cost of Rs. 1.000/ -.
(3.) THE learned Assistant District Judge has framed the following issues :
"1. Is the suit barred by limitation?
2. Is the suit bad for mis -joinder and non -joinder of parties?
3. Whether late Delaluddin Ahmed made a gift of the land in suit to the defendants Nos. 19 to 21? And if so, was it valid in law?
4. Whether the defendants Nos. 10 to 21 sold the land in suit and delivered possession thereof to the plaintiff?;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.