Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) Plaintiff-Petitioner sought to adduce rebuttal evidence under Order XVIII, Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code to prove that (A) Maitun Nisha was daughter of Sabul Mian, (B) Maitun Nisha sold the suit property to the plaintiff by registered sale deed, and (C) the plaintiff constructed house on the suit land and is in possession of the suit property and living therein with his family members. Learned trial Court i.e. the Court of Senior Civil Judge-I, Sahebganj by the impugned order dated 29th April, 2015 passed in Title (Partition) Suit No. 17 of 2004, has refused the prayer.
(3.) The following issues were framed by learned trial Court after completion of pleadings where the plaintiff through plaint has set up a case that he acquired the suit land by registered sale deed dated 8th July, 1985 executed by Maitun Nisha, daughter of Late Saduli Mian, after payment of consideration money and has been in possession of the same thereafter. He has also constructed Pucca house in December, 1985 and has been living with his family members. Following six issues were framed as under: (1) Is the suit as framed maintainable? (2) Has the plaintiff any cause of action for the suit? (3) Is the suit bad for mis-joinder and nonjoinder of necessary parties? (4) Is suit barred by principles of waiver and acquiescence, estoppel and law of limitation? (5) Is the plaintiff entitled to recover the possession of the suit premises? (6) Is the plaintiff entitled to get any relief or reliefs as claimed for in the suit?;