ANISUL REHMAN Vs. ABDUL BARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the opposite party even after several notices validly served on him.

(2.) Petitioner is the sole defendant of Title Suit No. 52 of 1993 which was filed by the plaintiff-opposite party for declaration that possession given to the defendant in Execution Case No. 1 of 1987 was illegal and also for recovery of possession and injunction etc.

(3.) It transpires from the record of the case including the impugned order that the plaintiff had claimed that in an earlier suit bearing Partition Suit No. 79 of 1972 a decree for partition was passed, but due to the collusion of Advocate Commissioner, wrong allotment was made in the Final decree according to which the defendant got delivery of possession over the land of the plaintiff who was not a party in the said Partition Suit. It does not appear from the record that either the said Final decree was challenged in any appeal etc. by any one or it was ever set aside, reversed or modified by any Court of law.