ANOWAR SHEIKH & ORS. Vs. MD. MUSEBUDDIN AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the judgment and decree dated 8.3.1984 of the Court of Assistant District Judge No.2, Nowgong which reversed the judgment and decree passed by the Munsiff, Morigaon on 27.7.1981 in Title Suit No. 11/80.

(2.) The main question for determination in this appeal is whether defendant No. 3, who claimed to have purchased the suit land from defendant Nos. 1 & 2 is protected as bonafide purchaser for value and consideration under Sec. 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

(3.) The case of the plaintiffs (Respondents herein) was that the suit land belonged to one Muluk Munchi who was the father of the plaintiff Nos. 1 to 7. The said land was settled in the name of Muluk Munshi and later a periodic patta was also issued in his name. He was in possession of the said land during his life time and after his death it was possessed by plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 7 are his legal heirs. The defendants No. 1 and 2 are the step brothers of Muluk Munshi. On 20.3.1980, these two defendants, along with defendant No.3 forcibly occupied the suit land and constructed thatched house thereon. The plaintiffs, thereafter, filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit land. The suit was contested by defendants 1 to 3. The case of the defendants was that the suit land was in possession of Defendants Nos. 1 & 2 whose names were also entered in the chitha. These defendants sold it to the Defendant No.3 Julhas Ali and his brothers Mannas Ali and Safique Islam (Defendants nos. 3 (1) & 3(2) on 21.4.1980 for a consideration of Rs. 3000.00 by a registered deed of sale and also delivered possession thereof to them. It was claimed that by virtue of the purchase of the suit land from defendants No. 1 and 2, defendants Nos. 3,3(1) and 3(2) acquired good title in the suit land. A number of issues were framed. Three witnesses were examined. On consideration of the facts of the case and the documents on record, the learned Trial Court decreed the suit. On appeal, the learned Assistant District Judge, Now gong framed an additional issue, namely, issue No. 5(a), which read as follows: