SMT. NUMALI KAYASTHA AND ORS. Vs. HEMANTA KUMAR BARUAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Second Appeal two questions viz. 1 Whether the plaintiff's suit is hit by principles of res judicata, and ii) Whether the appellate court failed to consider material documents on record, were formulated as substantial questions of law.

(2.) At the time of hearing Dr. M.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted before this Court that another ground i.e. whether there was substantial compliance of Rule 31 Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure in passing the impugned judgment. On these three questions of law, Dr. Sharma has submitted that the appellate judgment of the Asstt. District Judge passed in Title Appeal No. 62/83 cannot be sustained.

(3.) The respondent was the plaintiff in the original suit. He filed the suit for recovery of possession of the suit land by evicting the appellants/defendants. The plaintiffs case is that he instituted the Title Suit No. 83/69 in the trial court failed to frame issue regarding res judicata. The Asstt. District Judge also dismissed the appeal. Hence, this Second Appeal.