(1.) THIS appeal, under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') is directed against the judgment and order, dated 22.5.99, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in Title Appeal No.12 of 1996. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Addl. District Judge reversed the judgment and decree dated 26.8.1996 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dharmanagar, in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, in Title Suit No.02 of 1993.
(2.) THE appellant, as plaintiff, instituted Title Suit No.02 of 1993 against the respondent No.1, seeking a decree for declaration of right, title, possession and perpetual injunction against the defendant No.1 in respect of the suit land i.e the land mentioned in the Schedule II to the plaint. THE brothers of the defendant No.1 were added as proforma defendant Nos.2 and 3, while the vendor of the vendor of the plaintiff was added as proforma-defendant No.4.
(3.) THE defendant No.1 contested the plaintiff's case, by filing a separate written statement. In his written statement, while alleging that the plaintiff's suit was barred by law of Limitation and that the suit was not maintainable, the answering defendant No.1 stated that Rajani Lal Sadhu, who was the original owner of land, in his life time sold his entire land including the suit land to the father of the defendants, on 1.2.63, and, on being permitted by his father, the defendant No.1 used to live in the said land, covered by CS plot 1325 under khatian 272 since 1975. THE defendant No.1 further averred that he was possessing the said land as its owner, acquiring the title on the basis of the sale, made in favour of his father, by the original owner. He denied the claim of the plaintiff that the proforma-defendant No.4 was the legal heir of the original owner and also contended that the proforma defendant No.4 had no right to sale the land in favour of the person, from whom the plaintiff claimed to have purchased the suit land.