SANKAR CHANDRA PAUL Vs. PRAKASH CHANDRA SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. L. Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) In this Revision Application, judgment and decree dated 23.09.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dvision), Nagaon in Title Appeal No. 12/2004 is put under challenge. The plaintiff/respondent filed Title Suit No. 32/1997 in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Hojai at Sankardev Nagar for ejectment and arrear rent from the defendant/petitioner. It is pleaded in the plaint that the tenanted premises measuring 10 ft X 10 ft in size under holding No. 44 Ward No. 6, Hojai Town, Mouza Hojai, Dist- Nagaon pertaining to Dag No. 496, Periodic Patta No. 82 under Hojai town, Kisam No. 2, Mouza Hojai, dist- Nagaon Assam originally belonged to one Late Tirath Singh Punjabi. During his life time he let out to various tenants after construction of shop premises over the said land. The defendant/petitioner is one of such tenant occupying the tenanted premises described in the schedule of the plaint. Out of the said tenants, late Tirath Singh Punjabi sold the said land to various tenants possessing the same. The plaintiffs/respondents were also tenants under the said Tirath Singh Punjbai. Both the plaintiffs/ respondents purchased 6 Lechas and 40 sq. ft. 6 sq. inches of land each by two registered sale deeds bearing Nos. 1114 and 1115 dated 04.05.1993 and the khas possession was delivered to them. The plaintiffs/ respondents after having purchased the said land measuring more or less 12 lechas 80 sq. ft. and 12 sq inches became the owners of the said premises and the defendant/petitioner attorned the plaintiffs/respondents as the landlord and agreed to pay the monthly rent to them but the said defendant/petitioner did not pay the rent to the plaintiffs/respondents even after receipt of the notice issued by the plaintiffs. Pleader's notice was issued to the defendant but the defendant/petitioner informed the plaintiffs/respondents that he had deposited the monthly rent in the Court in the name of Tirath Singh Punjabi and on his death in the name of legal heirs of deceased Tirath Singh Punjabi. It is the plea taken by the plaintiffs/respondents that the defendant/petitioner denied the ownership/title of the plaintiffs/respondents over the suit premises for which the suit was filed for ejectment of the defendant/petitioner along with arrear rent.

(3.) The defendant/petitioner filed written statement and took various plea in respect of the maintainability of the suit. The pleadings of the defendant/petitioner is that he was a monthly tenant under Tirath Singh Punjabi in respect of suit premises and he has been paying the monthly rent to Tirath Singh Punjabi and on his death to his legal heirs. The plaintiffs/respondents never informed about the sale transaction of the land between the plaintiffs and its owner Tirath Singh Punjabi. Though Tirath Singh Punjabi sold land to other tenants but he failed to mention the respective boundaries of the land purchased by the said tenants and as such the suit premises is not identifiable. On the basis of the said defence, the defendant/petitioner sought for dismissal of the suit. The following issues were framed by the learned trial court:-