AHMED MEAH Vs. EJAHAR MEAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave arises from judgment and order dated 11 March, 1984 passed analogously in Civil Orders No. 61 and 62 of 1984 by a Single Judge of the High Court Division (Chittagong Bench) summarily rejecting two revisional applications of the appellant filed under section 115(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) Facts of the case, briefly, are that landlords-respondents No. 3-10 instituted Rent Suits No.15 and 16 of 1958 for recovery of arrear rent of 1362 B. S. against Rashid a Khatun (deceased), mother of the appellant relating to two separate holdings held by said Rashida Khatun. The Suits were decreed ex-parte and the holdings were put to sale in Rent Execution Cases No.101 and 103 of 1958 respectively. Respondent No.1 Ejahar Meah purchased both the holdings on 20-5-58 at separate auction sales and the sales were duly confirmed.

(3.) Appellant filed Miscellaneous Judicial case Nos. 37 and 38 respectively of 1967 for setting aside the said sales under Section 173/174(3) of the B. T. Act on 19-4-67 on the ground that decree was obtained fraudulently and there were material irregularities and/or fraud in publishing and conducting the sale. It was also contended that there was no arrear of rent for the period in question and that respondent No. 2 father of the appellant at the instigation of appellant's step-mother managed to auction purchase the holdings collusively in the benami of respondent No.1 who is the brother of the husband of the daughter by the previous husband of the wife of Respondent No. 2.