Sahidullah Munshi, J. - (1.) The present appeal was admitted by the Hon'ble Division Bench by an order dated 27th September, 2002 on ground nos. (I), (II) and (IV). The said grounds are as follows: I. whether the Learned Civil Judge, senior division erred in law in not considering that the possession of the plaintiffs upon the suit property and the price of the land at the relevant time was Rs.7,000/- which was shockingly low and in such view of the matter the impugned transaction dated 17th February, 1974 was nothing but a loan transaction. II. whether the Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division erred in law in not following the legal tests in order to decide that the impugned transaction dated 17th February, 1974 was a loan transaction or out and out sale. IV. Whether the Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division erred in law in not considering the most important aspect, namely, the possession of the property and also the price of the property at the relevant point of time in order to decide whether the disputed transaction was a loan transaction or out and out sale.
(2.) At the time of admission the Hon'ble Division Bench was also pleased to formulate an additional ground to the effect, "whether the judgement of the first Appellate Court passed on surmises and conjectures and considerations of which are not relevant in judgement under the Bengal Money Lenders Act can be called a proper judgement under the Bengal Money Lenders Act and can be proper judgement rendered by the First Appellate Court."
(3.) At the time of admission the Hon'ble Division Bench also took note of the fact that the appellants filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure to bring on record additional evidence and on the said application the Division Bench directed that the said application under Order XLI Rule 27 would be heard along with the appeal.;