NARAYAN BEDIA Vs. DAMBARUNATH BARGOHAIN AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of title to and khas possession of the land in suit measuring 33 B. 2 K. 15 Ls., covered by periodic patta No. 19 of 1927-28 of Pankialgaon, Mouza Marangi.

(2.) The facts leading to the suit are as follows.

(3.) The land in suit originally belonged to Juran, father of defendant 1. He sold it by a registered sale deed to the father of defendants 2-4 on 14th Sept. 1933. Juran died soon after the sale. His son defendant 1 who was in possession of the land instituted a suit to establish his title against defendants 2-4. His attempt did not succeed. The suit was dismissed. He, however, continued to remain in possession of the property and thus forced defendants 2-4 to institute a suit against him for obtaining necessary redress on the basis of the sale-deed which had been executed in favour of their father. The suit was for a declaration of title and khas possession. It was decreed after contest on 21st Oct. 1941. Before defendants 2-4 could obtain delivery of possession in execution of the decree passed in their favour, the land in suit was sold under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation for recovery of arrears of land revenue due from defendants 2-4. It is worthy of note that the arrears for which the land was sold were arrears due from defendants 2-4 in respect of land other than the land in suit. The sale, therefore, was under Sec. 91, Land and Revenue Regulation. Kankeswar Bargohain, father of the plaintiffs in the present case, purchased the land at the revenue sale. The revenue authorities could only give him symbolical possession and referred him to the civil Court for obtaining actual possession. This they could not deliver on account of resistance by defendant 1 who was in possession. It is in pursuance of this direction that plaintiffs instituted the suit which gave rise to this appeal.