SHAHABUDDIN CHISTI Vs. RAJDHANI UNNAYAN KATRIPAKHYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal, by leave, is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.08.2004 passed by the High Court Division in First Appeal No.219 of 2003 allowing the appeal setting aside the judgment and decree dated 20.02.2003 passed by the Joint District Judge, 1st Court, Dhaka in Title Suit No. 99 of 1999 decreeing the same.

(2.) The facts of the case, in short, are that the plaintiff appellant instituted Title Suit No.99 of 1999 for declaration that the suit property is his personal property and that the suit property is not a play ground or an open field or a water reservior/river and also for declaring memo dated 06.04.1999 issued by the defendant No.1 Rajdhani Unnayan Katripakkhya in short RAJUK as illegal, without jurisdiction and not binding upon the plaintiff.

(3.) In the plaint it was asserted, inter alia, that the suit land belonged to Israt Reba Mohammad Zunaid and Shamim Ara Rafique who proposed to sell the property to the plaintiff and accordingly on 05.10.1991 an agreement was executed between the parties and subsequently, the executors refusing to executed the deed of sale the plaintiff appellant filed Title Suit No.46 of 1997 for Specific Performance of Contract and the suit being decreed, in Execution Case No.1 of 1998 a deed of sale was executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff who thereafter mutated his name in the Government sheresta and paid rents to the Government and in order to construct a multi-storied building on the suit land applied to the RAJUK and RAJUK by memo dated 25.03.1998 approved the plan and erected boundary wall, raised earth and made pilling works and got electricity connection and stored construction materials in the suit property and advanced huge amount for supplying construction materials and the plaintiff on 24.01.1999 entered into an agreement with the Entrium Real Estate for making construction on the suit land and in terms of the agreement the Real Estate invested TK.30,00,000.00 for making the construction and while the plaintiff through developer was starting construction he was surprised to receive memo, dated 06:04.1999 from RAJUK withdrawing the approval of the plan and directing him to take the amount deposited by him for approval of the plan alleging that the suit property was open field, water reservoir and river. The plaintiff then requested the defendant No.1 RAJUK to revoke the aforesaid memo dated 06.04.1999 but to no effect and hence filed the suit and that during pendency of the suit the defendant No.1 dispossessed the plaintiff and took forcible possession and as such, the plaint was amended adding a prayer for recovery of khas possession of the suit land.