MUNSHI MAHOMED ALI MIA Vs. SRIMATI KIBERIA KHATUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties to this appeal may be described as Mahomed Ali Meah defendant-appellant and Kiberia Khatun the plaintiff-respondent. The suit was for establishment of plaintiff s taluka right on setting aside the sale held in execution of the decree in contribution Suit No. 31 of 1906, the defendant being the purchaser of the property in suit. The plaintiff is a subsequent purchaser of the same property. In another litigation (Suit No. 485 of 1906,) between the same parties, a solenama or compromise was filed on the 15th December 1906, where in the ownership by purchase of the defendant was admitted by the plaintiff s predecessor, Kala Meah.

(2.) Both the lower Courts have given the plaintiff a decree declaring his title. In the turn that this case has taken, we are now Concerned with one property only, namely property No. 29.

(3.) On behalf of the defendant, it has been contended, first, that the lower appellate Court has misinterpreted the solenama, and, secondly, that the sale at which the defendant purchased rot having been set aside, the plaintiff s present suit cannot be proceeded.