MUKHASH SAMPRADAYA Vs. BIRASH CH DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application arises out of the judgment and order dated 6-1-89 passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, Karimganj in Misc. Appeal No. 20/88 affirming the judgment and order dated 2-3-88 passed by the learned Munsiff No. II, Karimganj in Misc. Case No. 15/88 arising out of T. S. No. 334/87.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff petitioner was that he was in possession of a room of a building since 1974 and in that particular room they had their belongings and they used to rehearsal etc. in that room. On 29-11-87 the defendants placed fencing around the campus described in schedule of the plaint and also put a lock over the lock of the plaintiff in one room which was in possession of the plaintiff. The plaintiff thus having been dispossessed wrongfully filed the aforesaid title suit that is T.S. No. 334/87 in the Court of Munsiff No. II, Karimganj and along with the plaint he also filed an application for injunction in the mandatory form and also prayed for injunction in the prohibitory form not to change the nature and character of the suit room. The learned Munsiff granted an ad interim injunction in the prohibitory form but subsequently on consideration of the objection and the written statement filed by the defendants vacated this order of injunction. Being aggrieved by this order passed by the learned Munsiff on 2-3-88 the plaintiff filed Misc. Appeal No. 20/88 before the learned Assistant District Judge, Karimganj. The learned Assistant District Judge after hearing, the parties by his order dated 6-1-89 dismissed the appeal. Hence this revision application.

(3.) The learned Assistant District Judge in dismissing the appeal mainly found that the plaintiff has failed to make out a prima facie case. He also found that the defendants had a better title to the room in question.