SAKTI RAM GULATI Vs. LALPATI HALOAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 02.04.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) No.1, Silchar in Title Appeal No.42/2002 dismissing the said appeal and affirming the judgment and decree dated 26.08.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Silchar in Title Suit No.104/2001.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief is that the plaintiff had entered into the suit land about 30 years back as a monthly tenant under the defendant on condition of payment of nominal rent and had thereafter, started his business as cloth merchant in a kutcha shed, constructed by the defendant. Thereafter, the defendant along with her son Rajkumar Haloai transferred the jote right on the suit land in favour of the plaintiffs by executing an unregistered deed on 28.09.1994, on the basis of which the plaintiffs took the suit land from the owners, who had also recognized them as tenant by accepting rents while issuing receipts. Thereafter, by means of a registered deed of purchase dated 03.09.1999 executed by Kamakhya Dasgupta, one of the legal heirs of late Paresh Das Gupta, the plaintiff had purchased the plot of land measuring 6 chataks covered by dag No.5 of 2nd R.S. Patta No.4 under Lakhipur Mouza - Lalong in the district of Cachar and thereafter, acquired maliki right in respect of the said land. It is also the case of the plaintiff that by virtue of the aforementioned purchase on payment of valuable construction, the plaintiff had also got delivery of khas possession of the land on 03.09.1999, i.e., on the date of execution of the sale deed itself and on such basis, the plaintiff had acquired clear marketable title and interest over the suit land being in possession thereof.

(3.) IT is also the case of the plaintiffs that in 1998 there was a fire which gutted many houses in that area including the house under occupation of the plaintiffs standing over the suit land. After the fire, the suit land remained vacant and under the possession of the plaintiffs for sometime. On the basis of their maliki right acquired by the purchase of the land from its owner Kamakhya Dasgupta, the plaintiff also constructed a house with C.I. Sheet roofing fitted with wooden post with iron angle and walls and covered by Tarja fencing etc. On 09.05.2001, the defendant had trespassed into the suit land and forcibly dispossessed the plaintiffs from the said land which has given rise to the cause of action for filing the suit. The plaintiffs has, therefore, prayed for a decree declaring their right, title and interest over the suit schedule land and house standing thereupon, for recovery of khas possession by evicting the defendant from the suit land, for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession of the suit land by the plaintiffs and also for other consequential reliefs.