MOST. SAJEYA BEGUM Vs. MD. SHAHIDUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 103 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh is directed against the judgment and order dated the 26th day of October, 2008 passed by the High Court Division in Civil Revision No.6169 of 1991 making the Rule absolute thereby setting aside the judgment and decree dated 17.12.1987 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Chuadanga in Title Appeal No. 83 of 1984 thereby reversing those dated 26.12.1979 passed by the Munsif, Chuadanga in Title Suit No. 679 of 1974 dismissing the suit.

(2.) The facts involved in the case, in short, are that the suit property belonged to Bidya Nath Kunda and the said property was put to auction for arrear of rent in Certificate Case No.7(S) 60-61 on 25th July, 1962 and thereafter took possession through Court on 10th March, 1965 and the auction purchaser plaintiff and defendant No.3 has been in exclusive enjoyment and possession of the suit property and the pro-forma defendant No.3 transferred his interest in favour of the plaintiff and the plaintiff has been in exclusive possession of the property by cultivation. The plaintiff who is a simple village folk was in expectation that the land will be recorded in his name the plaintiff-respondent for the first time in 1378 B.S. equivalent to 1971 came to learn that the suit property has been wrongly recorded in the name of the predecessor of the defendant in khatian No. 181 and 466 and the defendant having threatened dispossession on the basis of wrong record the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of title and for declaration that the khatian in the name of the defendant-petitioner is wrong. In the plaint it was alleged that in a fine in the house of the plaintiff the sale certificate and right of delivery of possession was almost burnt and it was recovered as such.

(3.) The predecessor of the petitioner contested case by filing written statement contending, inter alia, that Certificate Case No. 7(s) 60-61 is fake and Baidya Nath Kunda died long before filing of the alleged certificate in the name of Baidya Nath Kunda is false and Baidya Nath had no interest in the khatain the R.O.R. was wrong and there was delivery of possession on 10.03.1965 is false and the khatian prepared in the name of the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 was correct and the land of C.S. Khatian Nos. 259, 261 was purchased by the landlord and leased out to Mahmud Ali Mondal and two others and as there was arrear of rent of the landlord Fatik Chandra who were the auction purchaser sold to Nirola Bibi and others on 16.03.1939 and the defendants are the purchasers from Nirola Bibi by kabala dated 09.09.1957 and their names have been recorded in the name of the defendants and they have been in enjoyment and possession.