MUSTT. HAZERA KHATUN Vs. HASMAT ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. AR Sikdar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. A. Alam, learned counsel for the respondents. Here the appellant is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants. The name of the respondent No. 7 has been struck out vide order dated 19.01.2007 passed in MC No. 2604/2006 of this court.

(2.) The plaintiff-appellant instituted title suit No. 23/1993 against the defendants-respondents for declaration that the judgment passed on 20.04.1989 in connection with title suit No. 37/1987 in favour of the defendants/respondents Nos. 1 to 4 is illegal and fraudulent and the order passed on 11.05.1993 in connection with Misc. Case No. 67/1992 in favour of the defendants/respondents Nos. 1 to 4 be set aside and thereafter to pass a decree for declaration of the subsisting title and confirmation of possession with perpetual injunction so that the defendants/respondents cannot dispossess the plaintiff/appellant from the subject matter of the suit as the land measuring 4 Bighas under Dag No. 326 of KP Patta No. 69 of village Dimapur under Mouja Rapasi in the district of Barpeta is a part and parcel of total land measuring 11B 15L.

(3.) The suit land originally belonged to Kutu Munsi and the defendants/ respondents Nos. 5 to 7 being his daughter inherited the suit property and got their names mutated on 09.06.1992. The defendants/respondents Nos. 5 to 7 sold the suit land to the plaintiff appellant for valuable consideration of Rs. 25,000.00 vide registered sale deed No. 253 and got delivery of possession thereon. It was further pleaded that the defendants/respondents Nos. 1 to 4 being the brothers of respondents Nos. 5 to 7 fraudulently obtained a decree in respect of the suit land on 20.04.1989 in connection with title suit No. 37/1987 against the defendants/ respondents Nos. 5 to 7 in the court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Barpeta ex parte. Defendants/ respondents Nos. 5 to 7 filed a Misc. Case No. 67/1992 for setting aside the ex parte decree and for restoration of title suit No. 37/1987. Ultimately, they came to a clandestine compromise and got the Misc. Case No. 67/1992 dismissed with a view to deprive the plaintiff appellant and as such the plaintiff/ appellant was constrained to file the present title suit No. 23/1993 against the defendants/respondents for the reliefs mentioned herein above.