NARAYAN MAZUMDAR & 2 OTHERS Vs. PABITRA MAZUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 18.12.2015 passed by learned Munsiff No.1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in Title Suit No.192/2010. By that order the learned Munsiff allowed an application under Order XVIII Rules 4(2) and 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiff at the argument stage and the suit was fixed for additional evidence thereby.

(2.) The sole opposite party herein as plaintiff instituted Title Suit No.192/2010 in the Court of learned Munsiff No.1, Kamrup at Guwahati against the petitioners and one Bijit Mazumdar as main defendants and four others as proforma defendants praying for declaration of right, title and interest, recovery of khas possession and permanent injunction. In that suit a reference was made that the properties inherited by the parties to the suit had been subjected to partition by a family settlement dated 04.01.1987 and on that basis the plaintiff was entitled to the suit land.

(3.) The principal defendants having appeared contested the claim of the plaintiff and denied the claim of family settlement as pleaded in the plaint. The proforma defendants did not appear and did not file any written statement. After both parties had concluded their evidence and the suit was fixed for argument, at this stage, plaintiff filed an application under Order XVIII Rules 4(2) and 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC praying for allowing the plaintiff to prove and exhibit plaint of Title Suit No.64/2014 by way of re-examination of PW 1. It is stated in paragraph 4 of the application that the plaintiff came to know about the document only in the month of June, 2015 and this is why it could not be produced before the Court as evidence. The aforesaid Title Suit No.64/2014 was instituted by one Jyotish Mazumdar against Debeswar Mazumdar both of whom are proforma defendants in the present suit and neither the plaintiff has any claim against them nor did they contest the suit. It is the case of the plaintiff that the proforma defendant No.8 being plaintiff instituted Title Suit No.64/2014 against proforma defendant No.7 Debeswar Mazumdar as sole defendant and therein a reference as to family settlement was made. According to the plaintiff, the plaint of the aforesaid suit is relevant for proper adjudication of the matter in dispute.