SUKUMAR MONDAL Vs. BAPUJI SAMABHAI KRISHI PAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, five (5) in numbers, call in question the legality and validity of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Nagaon in Title Appeal No. 5/99 whereby and whereunder the learned first appellate court dismissed the appeal thereby affirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Kaliabar in Title Suit No. 9(k)/96. Heard Mr. A. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Ms T. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. P.S. Deka, learned State counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5.

(2.) Material facts, in a nutshell, are as follows:-

(3.) On receipt of the summons the defendant Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28 and 29 contested the suit by filing their written statement taking all the pleas available under Order VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' for short). The pleaded fact of the defendants was that the Government of Assam had never settled the suit land in favour of the plaintiffs and had never delivered physical possession of the suit land to the plaintiff cooperative society, rather the defendants have been possessing the suit land for more than 20 years and they are still possessing the suit land. The case of the defendants are that the plaintiffs are not in occupation of the land and they have no right, title and interest over the suit land and in regard to dispossession, the defendants have averred that the question of dispossession does not arise since the plaintiffs were never in physical possession of the suit land since the paramount title of the suit land remained with the Government of Assam, and they have the possessory right over the suit land as described in the plaint and hence there is no cause of action and the suit is liable to be dismissed.