RASAMOY NAMASUDRA Vs. PRANESH CHANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal at the instance of the plaintiff is directed against the appellate judgment and decree dated 07.03.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karimganj, in Title Appeal No. 10 of 1996 allowing the appeal and thereby, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of a deed of reconveyance. The suit of the plaintiff was decreed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Karimganj, in Title Suit No. 163 of 1990 on 21.12.1995. As against the said decree the defendant preferred Title Appeal No. 10 of 1996 and the learned First Appellate Court reversed the finding of the learned trial court consequently dismissing the suit of the plaintiff.

(2.) THE appellant, as plaintiff, instituted Title Suit No. 163 of 1990 in the Court of learned Munsiff No.1 at Karimganj stating that on 23.06.1982 he borrowed a sum of Rs.5,000/ - from the sole defendant and thereupon executed a registered sale deed in favour of the defendant on the same date but possession of the suit land was not handed over to him. By executing a registered ekrarnama (agreement of reconveyance) on the same date the defendant undertook to execute a registered deed. A recital of the terms and conditions of this agreement shows that the defendant was entitled to enjoy the suit land for 3 years and thereafter within the next 5 years if the plaintiff returns the sum of Rs.5,000/ - to the defendant then the defendant would execute a deed of reconveyance in favour of the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff on 02.04.1990 he repaid the money to the defendant in full but the defendant did not execute the deed of reconveyance and rather threatened that the plaintiff would be dispossessed from the suit land. Hence, the suit for specific performance.

(3.) ON such rival contentions of the pnies, the learned Munsiff framed as many as 6 issues and the same are quoted below: