CHANDRA KANTA KALITA AND OTHERS Vs. GOKUL KALITA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the plaintiffs and is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Assistant District Judge, Barpeta, in Title Appeal No. 39 of 1970.

(2.) THE material facts may be briefly stated :

(3.) AFTER trial the learned Munsiff decreed the plaintiff's suit, but on appeal the learned Assistant District Judge reversed the judgment and decree of the learned Munsiff. The plaintiff has proved Ex. 1, the sale deed dated 1 -5 -36, by which he along with defendant No. 6 purchased 7 B. 1 K. 6 Lechas from defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4. On the other hand the defendant has failed to prove any document in support of his claim of purchase from Ramo. The learned Munsiff, on. a consideration of the materials on record, came to the finding, and in my opinion correctly, that the plaintiff has proved title to the suit land. This finding of the trial Court has not been set aside by the learned Assistant District Judge.