SAJJAD ALI Vs. TASIRUDDIN SHEIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 11.4.2008 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge-I, Rajmahal in T.A. No. 4 of '2006 affirming and upholding the judgment and decree dated 31.1.2006 passed by the learned Sub Judge-III, Rajmahal in T.S. No. 19 of 1989. The appellant was the plaintiff in the said T.S. No. 19 of 1989. He had filed the said suit for declaration of his right, title and for confirmation of possession over the suit land appertaining to J.B. No. 300, plot no. 844, Area-1 Bigha, 9 Kathas, 13 Dhurs of village Lakhipur, P.S. Rajmahal, Dist. Sahebganj. According to the plaintiff the said land was recorded in the name of his father Kalu Sheikh, the plaintiff has been in possession of the suit land till the date of institution of the suit and he has been paying rent in respect of the land, continuously. The Defendant No. 1, Tasiruddin Sheikh has absolutely no right, title and interest over the same. His claim of having purchased the same long back on 10.6.1939 from Neyamat Sheikh by an un- registered sale deed is wholly false and baseless. The claim of defendant nos. 2 and 3 of having purchased the said land from defendant no. 1 by virtue of registered sale deed of 1987 is wholly false and baseless. The said defendants maliciously raised the dispute which led to a proceeding u/s 144 Cr.P.C. way back in the year 1988. But the proceeding was dropped. However, the Defendant no. 2 and 3 succeeded in getting their names mutated in the Circle Office, Rajmahal. The Plaintiff had preferred appeal before the S.D.O. against the mutation order, but his appeal was dismissed by the order dated 22.2.1989. The plaintiff ultimately instituted the instant suit for the aforesaid relief.

(2.) The defendants appeared and contested the suit. It was inter-alia stated that the father of defendant nos. 2 and 3 i.e., Defendant No. 1 had purchased the land long back in the year 1939 and since thereafter, the land was in their possession.. However, the, defendant no. 1 transferred the said land in favour of the Defendant No. 2 and 3 by way of registered sale deed in the year 1987 and put the said defendants in possession. The said defendants have been in continuous peaceful possession of the suit land since after their purchase. Their names were mutated in the C.O. Office and they have been paying rent continuously and getting receipt thereof. The Defendants have perfect and valid right, title and the plaintiff has absolutely got no right, title and interest over the suit land. The defendants also raised several objection against the maintainability of the suit.

(3.) Learned trial court on the basis of the said pleadings, framed several issues.