MD. ASADUL HAQUE Vs. MD. ANISUZZAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.12.2005 of the High Court Division disposing First Miscellaneous Appeal No. 258 of 2005 along with the Civil Rule No.856 (P.M.) of 2005 with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo in respect of possession of the suit land till disposal of the Title Suit No.13 of 2005 pending in the Court of Joint District judge, 2nd Court, Satkhira.

(2.) Brief facts are that the respondent Nos.1-5; as plaintiffs, preferred Title Suit No. 12 of 2004 before the First Court of Joint District Judge, Satkhira for partition of 12 decimals out of 22 decimals of land as described in schedule Kha of the plaint and during pendency of the above suit the Plaintiff respondent filed an application praying for injunction and the learned Joint District Judge, by order dated 24.7.2004, allowed the said prayer; being aggrieved the defendant petitioner No.18 preferred Miscellaneous Appeal No. 296 of 2004 which was disposed of by the High Court Division with a direction to maintain status quo till disposal of the above partition suit; thereafter the above Title Suit No.12 of 2004 being transferred to the Second Court of Joint District Judge, Satkhira was renumbered as Title Suit No.13 of 2005; during pendency of the above suit the plaintiff respondent filed, another application praying for an order of injunction restraining the defendant petitioners from making any construction in the suit land and the learned Joint District Judge, after hearing, rejected the said prayer; the plaintiff respondent then preferred Miscellaneous Appeal No. 258 of 2005 along with an application for injunction on the basis of which Civil Rule No. 433(F.M.) of 2004 was issued; then after hearing the High Court Division, disposed of both the appeal arid the Rule with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo till disposal of the Title Suit No.13 of 2004 and also directing the learned Joint District Judge to hear and dispose of the above suit as early as possible preferably within 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of the judgment.

(3.) The learned counsel for the defendant petitioners submits that the defendants have been in possession of the suit land since long and they started construction of a 5 storied building on the suit land and have invested huge amount of money and it is a settled principle of law that the possession of the suit land is vital in respect of granting status quo; the defendant Nos.18, 60 and 61 got the sole decree in the year of 1966 and since then the defendants possessed the suit land in their respective shares for more. then 30 years and admittedly the defendants being the co-sharers in the suit land have been paying rent all along and the plaintiffs also failed to have made out no prima facie case but without considering the above the High Court Division passed the impugned order without taking into consideration the fact that the defendants have not yet filed written statement and as such it is not possible for the trial Court to dispose of the suit within the stipulated period of 6(six) months as directed.