BISHA MIA Vs. NATUB ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants/defendants have impugned the judgment dated 17.11.2004 and the decree dated 29.11.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Barpeta, in Title Appeal No. 24/2003 affirming the judgment dated 22.8.2003 and decree dated 25.8.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. I, Barpeta, in Title Suit No. 33/01, decreeing the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs.

(2.) I have heard Mr. MH Rajborbhuiya, learned Counsel for the appellants. For the order, which I propose to pass, issuance of notice on the respondents is not necessary.

(3.) The respondents filed Title SuitNo.33/01 against the appellants/defendants and two proforma defendants praying for a decree inter alia for declaration of their right, title and interest in the suit land and for confirmation of possession thereof. The land involved in the suit was described to be measuring 6 bighas 2 kathas 1 lechas covered by Dag No, 72 under KP PattaNo. 119 situated at village Gadesali Pam, mauza Sarukhetri, District Barpeta, Assam. The respondents/plain tiffs' pleaded case in short is that their father late Neshu Seikh held annual patta of the land which was eventually converted into a periodic patta in his favour vide order dated 10.3.74 by thejurisdictional Circle Officer, The land was thus in the possession of their father and continued to be so till his death in the year 1981. On his death, the respondens plaintiffs, their sisters the proforma defendants and their mother inherited the property. Their mother expired soon thereafter and the proforma defendants relinquished their share in the property. According to the respondents/ plaintiffs, the appellants/defendants were their near relations being the sons of their uncle. The ancestral property was, however, partitioned amongst the heirs but the suit land remained in exclusive possession of the respondent's/plaintiffs' father. According to the respondents/plaintiffs, while they in their own right had been possessing the suit land, the appellants/defendants No. 1,2 and 3 secretly managed to get their names mutated in respect of the suit land. The respondents/ plaintiffs having unsuccessfully challenged the mutation in the higher forum approached the Civil Court for the reliefs aforementioned.