ABDUL SALAM Vs. RIMEMBER KHASIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a limit to which the parties can be allowed to litigate, more so by a cantankerous plaintiff who has filed the instant petition seeking interference with the impugned order dated 29th June, 2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kailashahar, Unakoti Judicial District, in Civil Misc (O) 18 of 2019 titled as Md. Abdul Salam Versus Md. Surfan Ali, refusing to attach 461 trees standing on the land in relation to which order of attachment was passed.

(2.) The instant petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, at the first instance only it ought to have been dismissed, if not for any other, than the sole reason, that plaintiff failed to plead and place on record all facts and documents leading to the filing of the instant petition.

(3.) On 21st December, 2015, Title Suit No.08 of 2018 was filed by Md. Abdul Salam against Rimember Khasia which came to be dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Court No.1, Kailashahar, Unakoti, Tripura vide judgment dated 31 st January, 2019 titled as Md. Abdul Salam Versus Sri Rimember Khasia. The said suit pertained to a specific performance of the alleged contract dated 13th March, 2003 in relation to the trees in question.