KANDARPA PATHAK Vs. MONO KANTA BARUAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel representing the respondents.

(2.) This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 03.03.2015 passed by the Court of learned Munsiff, Amingaon in Misc. (J) Case No. 196/2014 arising out of T.S. No. 64/2014, whereby, the petition filed by the petitioners/defendants under Order XIX Rule 2 of the CPC seeking leave to cross examine the respondent no. 1 was rejected.

(3.) The brief factual matrix of the case is that the respondent nos. 1 and 2, as plaintiffs, had earlier instituted T.S. No. 434/2013 in the Court of Munisff No. 1, Kamrup at Guwahati against the present petitioners and 4 others seeking a decree of declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit land and also for recovery of khas possession in respect thereof. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs had filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking leave to amend the plaint, inter-alia, on the ground that it was only from the written statement filed by the defendant nos. 1 and 3 that the plaintiffs had come to know for the first time that the plaintiffs and their deceased brother had sold the suit land to the father-in-law and father of the defendant nos. 1 and 3 respectively by registered sale deed bearing no. 5390 on 17.11.1964. By way of the proposed amendment, the plaintiffs, therefore, wanted to seek relief in respect of sale deed no. 5390 declaring the same to be void and inoperative in the eye of law.The said application was supported by an affidavit sworn by the respondent No. 1.