SAHAR ALI SHEIKH Vs. KORAP ALI SHEIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLATE judgment and decree dated 27.11.2002 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dhubri in Title Appeal No. 46 of 2000 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs reversing of judgment and decree dated 07.07.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 in Title Suit No. 305 of 1992 has been challenged in the present Second Appeal by the defendants.

(2.) MD . Korap Ali Sheikh and two others as plaintiffs instituted Title Suit No. 305 of 1992 in the Court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Dhubri, against the present appellants as principal defendants No. 1 to 3 and 5 others as proforma defendants praying for declaration of right, title and interest and possession over the suit land and for further declaration that defendants have no right, title and interest and possession over the Schedule -B land. There is no prayer for consequential relief in the prayer for decree of declaration. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they have been in possession of Schedule -B land as tenant under proforma defendants No. 1 to 5 who are legal heirs of original Jotdar late Joinuddin Mondal. Plaintiffs claimed to be in possession of the suit land since 1964 as tenant paying land revenue for the entire land described in Schedule -A to the plaint. According to the plaintiffs, since settlement operation 1960 -62 had started after creation of their tenancy, Khatian was not prepared in their favour and so their names did not occur as recorded tenants. The defendants No. 1 to 3 started claiming the land asserting title and also made an abortive attempt to dispossess the plaintiffs on 18th day of Kartik 1399 B.S. Situated thus, the right, title and interest of the plaintiffs over the suit land got clouded necessitating filing of the suit for declaration of their right, title and interest and possession over the suit land and for further declaration that defendants did not have right, title and interest or possession thereon.

(3.) ON the basis of these rival contentions of the parties, the learned Trial Court framed as many as 7 issues. However, subsequently, 2 additional issues were also framed by the learned Trial Court. These issues are stated below: