RAM PRASAD MANDAL Vs. URBASHI KALITA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 24.8.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Guwahati in Title Appeal No. 60/2006 whereby the appeal was dismissed by upholding the judgment and decree dated 30.6.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Guwahati in Title Suit No. 202/2004.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiffs, in short, is that they are owners of a plot of land measuring 1 katha 3 lechas in Dag No. 648 covered by KP Patta No. 290 situated at village -Kamakhya under Jhalukbari Mouza, details of which is given in schedule to the plaint. The plaintiffs constructed a semi -permanent house facing Chakreswar river. The defendant was known to the family of the plaintiffs for many years and on his request, the plaintiffs allowed him to live in the house constructed as the defendant assured the plaintiffs that he would purchase the house but he was short of money. The defendant made a katcha sale deed and asked the plaintiffs to sign thereon. The plaintiffs stated that they were not agreeable to the amount which the defendant had offered as consideration money on which the plaintiffs were told that the consideration money will be enhanced keeping at par with the market value. The plaintiffs were waiting for the defendant to come forward to execute the sale deed after negotiation of the consideration amount. The plaintiffs never suspected any foul play on the part of the defendant and they would have executed the sale deed on payment of consideration amount as assured. On 26.2.2002, the plaintiffs noticed that the defendant started renovation works in the house and on being enquired, they were told that repairing works were necessary and he was going to purchase the house within a short period. On 26.7.2004, the defendant started doing RCC construction which prompted the plaintiffs to ask the defendant to stop such construction works. In view of such action of the defendant, a suit was filed for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit premises; for recovery of possession of the suit premises by evicting the defendant and person(s) under him; for permanent injunction; for cost of the suit and for any other relief as the plaintiffs are entitled to.

(3.) THE defendant's case is that a plot of land was sold to him by the plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 in the year 1992 for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/ - by executing a sale deed dated 25.7.1992 and vacant possession of the land was handed over to him. Existence of any semi -permanent structure over the suit land was denied but he admitted that there was a temporary shed made of bamboo and thatch. Accordingly, possession of the land was handed over to the defendant after executing the katcha sale deed promising the defendant to register the sale deed on a later date. However, on one pretext or the other, the plaintiffs did not register the sale deed. After he had paid the full consideration money, the vacant possession of the land was handed over to him. He had completed construction of an RCC house in the year 2000. An Assam type house and garage, however, was completed in the year 2003 and they have been assessed by the Gauhati Municipal Corporation. The defendant being a bona fide purchaser of the land in question for consideration, he has right, title and interest over the land. Accordingly, while praying for dismissal of the suit of the plaintiffs, he prayed for declaring the defendant as the owner of the land described in the schedule to the written statement/counter -claim; declaring that the plaintiffs are bound to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the defendant in respect of the land described in the schedule within a specific time -frame and on failure of the plaintiffs to register the sale deed within the time -frame granted by the court, precept be issued for such registration; perpetually restraining the plaintiffs from in any way disturbing with the peaceful occupation of the defendants over the suit land; temporary injunction in terms of the prayer for perpetual injunction; cost of the proceeding and any other relief to which the defendant is entitled to.