BHASKAR SAIKIA AND OTHERS Vs. MD. ABDUL MANNAN AND OTHERS
LAWS(GAU)-2018-3-129
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on March 23,2018

Bhaskar Saikia And Others Appellant
VERSUS
Md. Abdul Mannan And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MIR ALFAZ ALI,J. - (1.) This second appeal by the defendants has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 3/8/2008 passed by the District Judge, North Lakhimpur in Title Appeal No. 1/2009, whereby the learned District Judge reversed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge in Title Suit No. 1/2004 and decreed the suit of the plaintiffs.
(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present second appeal are that the owner of the suit land measuring 4 K 6 Ls covered by Dag No. 161 (Old)/224 (New) was the predecessor of the defendants/appellants and the father of the plaintiffs was an occupancy tenant in respect of the suit land, who was possessing the same under the landlord paying rents. After the death of his father, the plaintiff inherited the suit land. The defendants/appellants in connivance with the revenue authority got an eviction proceeding initiated against the plaintiff/respondent, which was registered as Encroachment Case No. 1/2003. After receiving the notice of the eviction proceeding, the plaintiff/respondent instituted the T.S. No. 1/2004 for declaration of their right and title as tenants, for a declaration that the eviction proceeding initiated against the plaintiff/respondent was illegal, for confirmation of possession and other consequential reliefs.
(3.) The pleaded case of the defendants/appellants was that the plaintiff had no right over the suit land and the Khatian, on the basis of which the plaintiff claimed right over the suit land, was forged and the plaintiff instituted the suit only to obstruct the encroachment proceeding. Further case of the defendants was that the suit land was within the tribal belt and block and the plaintiff was not entitled to occupy the suit land in the tribal belt. It was also the case of the defendants that the suit land was owned by their father and after death of their father they became the owners of the suit land. The defendants/appellants stated that the suit was barred by Section 167 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation,1886. The defendants/appellants also put up a counter claim for declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit land and recovery of possession.;


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