MD. ANSARUL HAQUE Vs. BIBI SHAKILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants are the appellants in the present appeal. They have challenge the judgment dated 6th of April, 2010, passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Naugachhia in Title Appeal No. 136 of 2006.

(2.) The main thrust of the argument in support of the appeal is that the lower appellate court ought not to have remanded the matter to the trial court, after formulating the issue, when on most of the aspects and findings given by the trial court, the lower appellate court was in agreement with those issues or findings.

(3.) Suit was for a partition, which was sought to be resisted on the ground that the property in question had already been partitioned in the sense that there were registered deeds of gifts, executed by Sheikh Imamul Haque, the common ancestor to the parties to the dispute. So far as the registered deed of gift is concerned, there is unanimity of finding, both by the trial court as well as by the appellate court on the correctness thereof. Some dispute remained with regard to the so called oral gift made by Sheikh Imamul Haque, just before the municipal survey was being conducted. The oral gift part of the story has become the bone of contention and the property shown in schedule-B remained a bone of contention between the parties, which according to the appellate court was necessary to be decided in the matter.