SAKHINA KHATUN Vs. SHEIKH SULEMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26th August/1992 and the decree dt. 3.9.92 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Nowgong in T.A. No. 3/92, reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court dt. 13.1.92 and 21.1.92 passed by the Asstt. District Judge, Nowgong in Title Suit No.2/78.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondents case is that the suit land described in the schedule of the plaint originally belonged to the defendant No. 1 Sheikh Suleman. He has got right, title and interest over the suit land. As per plaint, the suit land measuring 7 B. 1 K. covered by dag No. 417 of periodic patta No. 138 out of an area of 17 B.4 K 13 Ls of land. The suit land also consist of an area of 2 K 15 Ls which is a touji land, covered by touji patta No. 416. He sold a plot of land measuring 1 B in favour of the plaintiff by a registered dt. 25.2.66. Again by a registered sale deed dt. 3.6.77 he sold 2 K 15 Ls of the plaintiff. Similarly defdt. No. 1 sold-another plot of land measuring 2 B by a registered deed dt. 7.9.67. The defdt. thereafter transferred 1 B of land in favour of the plaintiff by a registered deed dt. 22.10.67. Finally, on 11.2.69 he expressed his desire to sell another plot of land measuring 1 B 2 K. Again defdt. No. 1 sold 1 K of land in favour of the plaintiff on 22.6.73. Plaintiff also purchased 1 B of land from one Aman AH by a registered deed dt. 4.2.74. Thus, plaintiff became the owner of 7B 1 K of land. Accordingly, possession of the land was delivered to the plaintiff and the plaintiff then mutated his name in the relevant patta. But the defdts. collusively and fraudulently cancelled the name of the plaintiff from the patta for which plaintiff filed a case before the Executive Magistrate U/s 145 CrPC. after that defendants tried to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land. Hence, the plaintiff praying for his right, title and possession over the suit land. Further, defendants assert that the defendant No. 1 sold 3 Bighas of land to Abdul Suban and Fatik Bibi. Fatik Bibi and Abdus Suban sold the land to the defendant No.l Rajab Ali. After purchasing these defendants have been possessing;the land without any disturbance. The trial court on the basis of the pleadings framed as many as 9 issues. The issue Nos. 5,6,7 and 8 relevant to this proceeding are quoted beJow:- 5. Whether the suit is hit by adverse possession and limitation? 6. Whether the suit land was sold to the plaintiff, if any, get defendants and possession delivered? 7. Whether the plaintiff has got right, title and interest over the suit land? 8. Whether the defendant Abdul Sobhan and Must Fatik Bibi have saleable right to sell 3 Bighas of land covered by dag No. 207 under P.P. No. 46 to defendant Miraj Ali and Mohammed Ali and Sabaj Ali?

(3.) Learned trial court on examination of Ext. Ka and Kha in favour of the sons of defendant No. 1 by Abdul Subhan, DW 2 and his wife Mustt. Fatik Bibi in the year 1971 was not a valid transfer and accordingly issues were: decided in favour of the plaintiff. The learned trial court decided the issues in favour of the plaintiffs and decreed the suit. On appeal, learned trial court affirmed the issue Nos. 5 and 6 in favour of the plaintiff. The learned appellate court came to a finding that the plaiintiff purchased the suit land and taken possession thereof.