AMANAT HUSSAIN Vs. MUSTT SAHIDA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. P. Sarma, learned Senior counsel for the appellants in both the appeals. Also heard Mr. A. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in RSA 193/2004, and for respondent No. 1 in RSA 194/2004.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 in RSA 194/2004 had filed a suit, being Title Suit No. 10/94, in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division No. 1, at Goalpara, against the appellants in RSA 194/2004 for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of Schedule-A and ScheduleB land; for a decree of mesne profit @ Rs. 1,000/- per month with effect from 01.03.94 with interest @ 15% per annum; injunction, etc. Schedule-B land, measuring 1 Katha, is within Schedule-A land and Schedule-A land measures 1 Katha 12 Lecha. Recovery of possession was sought for in respect of Schedule-B land by evicting the defendants. The details in respect of the claim, as set out in the plaint will be adverted to subsequently. The suit was dismissed by the learned trial court by a judgment and decree dated 23.12.02. An appeal, being Title Appeal No. 4/2004, was preferred before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Goalpara, and by a judgment and decree dated 28.05.04, the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial court was reversed and the appeal was allowed.

(3.) The appellants in RSA 193/2004 had also filed a suit praying for right, title and interest in respect of Schedule-A land measuring 1 Katha 12 Lecha, which also formed the subject matter for declaration of right, title and interest in Title Suit No. 10/94. Prayer was made for recovery of possession of Schedule-B land measuring 12 Lecha as well as for cancellation of the sale deeds being Sale Deed No. 4398 dated 25.11.82 and Sale Deed No. 1965 dated 19.03.84 declaring the same to be void. Mesne profit @ Rs. 2,000/- per month from the date of institution of the suit was also a prayer in the suit. The suit was registered in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division No. 1, Goalpara, as Title Suit No. 75/94. The facts, as projected in the suit, would be dealt with at a subsequent stage. The suit was decreed by a judgement and decree dated 23.12.02. An appeal, being Title Appeal No. 3/04, was preferred before the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Goalpara, which was allowed by a judgment and decree dated 28.05.04.