KHALILUR RAHMAN (MD.) AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Khalilur Rahman (Md.) And Anr.
STATE OF ASSAM And ORS.
Click here to view full judgement.
PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA,J. -
(1.) 1.Heard Mr. NC Barooah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Mr. GP Bhowmik, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. M Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4 and Mr. TC Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3.
(2.) The present petitioners filed Title Suit No. 58/1984 in the court of learned Assistant District Judge, Dhubri against the State of Assam and Collector, Dhubri for a direction to the revenue authorities to correct the land records in respect of land measuring 81 Bighas covered by Dag No. 38, khas Khatian No. 1 of village Haldipara under Mouza Chaibari in the district of Dhubri along with declaration of the right, title and interest in respect of the suit land and permanent injunction. The suit was decreed on contest on 27.02.1990. The respondent State preferred Title Appeal No. 1/1990 in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Dhubri which was dismissed on contest and thereafter the respondent State filed Second Appeal No. 59/1991 before this court which too, was dismissed on 19.09.1997. Prior to disposal of the first appeal, Title Execution Case No. 3/1990 was preferred by all the decree holders and on the basis of the order passed by the Executing court precept was issued to the Assistant Settlement Officer (ASO), Chapar Circle thereby directing the ASO, Chapar Circle to demarcate after survey and identify the boundary of the decreetal land shown in the schedule of the said precept with the help of the police for which a separate direction is to be issued and thereafter fixing 19.04.1990 to submit the report. The said precept was delivered on 11.04.1990 to the Assistant Settlement Officer (ASO), Chapar Circle, Gouripur.
(3.) Thereafter, the present respondent No. 4 filed Title Suit No. 26/2002 in the court of learned Munsiff, Bilasipara impleading all the plaintiffs/ decree holders in Title Suit No. 58/1984 as defendants and the State of Assam as the proforma defendant. The said suit was filed for declaration that the decree obtained in Title Suit No. 58/1984 is a fraudulent one and liable to be cancelled along with the decree for right, title and interest and confirmation of possession and for permanent injunction. The suit was contested by the decree holders. The said suit subsequently renumbered as Title Suit No. 92/2007 was dismissed for default vide order dated 13.02.2008 passed by the learned Munsiff, Bilasipara. The said respondent No. 4 preferred an application under Order IX Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, CPC) which was dismissed vide order dated 25.03.2009. The said dismissal order has been put under challenge in CRP No. 275/2015 pending disposal. It is on record that the Title Execution Case No. 3/1990 was stayed by the Executing court on the prayer of the respondent No. 4 due to pendency of Title Suit No. 26/2002 which was subsequently renumbered as Title Suit No. 92/2007. It would not be out of place to mention here that the decree passed in title Suit No. 58/1984 went through the process of first appeal and second appeal and obviously during the pendency of the said first appeal and the second appeal, the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 58/1984 were stayed. Finally, the second appeal was dismissed on 19.09.1997. Thereafter, due to filing of the suit by the respondent No. 4, the Title Execution Case No. 3/1990 was stayed as per the record.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.