RSA 135/2004. Gauhati High Court

Case Number:RSA 135/2004
Judgement Date:May 24, 2020
Court:Gauhati High Court

Second Appeals arising out of suits for title and/or injunction



(The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)

Case No: RSA 135/ 2004

Khushed Ali …… Appellant

- Versus -

Arbesh Ali and others ..... Respondents

:: BEFORE ::


For the Appellant : Mr. N Dhar


For the Respondents : Mr. PK Deka


Date of Hearing : 20.04.2017

Date of delivery of

Judgment and Order : 24.05.2017


Heard Mr. N Dhar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. PK Deka, learned counsel for the respondents. The present appellant is one of the defendants in Title Suit No. 47/ 1997 filed by the plaintiff respondents. The plaintiff respondent No. 2 on his death was substituted by his legal heirs.

  1. The case of the plaintiff respondents in brief is that the second R.S. Patta No. 1 of Dolidahar Grant consists of 2039 Bighas 13 Kathas of land. One Khirod

    Page 1 of 9

    RSA 135/2004

    Ranjan Sinha purchased the same by way of auction sale whereafter amongst various persons, Akmol Ali, Abdul Karim, Akram Ali and Mosaid Ali purchased 339 B 18 K 12 CLs of land from the said Khirod Ranjan Sinha and the names were duly mutated in revenue records. The said Abdul Karim being the owner of 84 B 19 K 11 CLs 5 G of land, sold 14 B 3 K 4 CLs land to one Abdul Gaffar vide registered deed No. 165 dated 05.01.1980 and 12 B 6 K to Hazira Bibi vide registered sale deed No. 5229 dated 15.07.1985. Akmol Ali sold 1 B 16 K 6 CLs to the daughters and wife of Abdul Gaffar and Abdul Karim. By way of registered sale deed No. 3450 dated 27.11.1989, the said Abdul Gaffar, Hazira Bibi and Sufia Khatun sold 16 B 7 K 7 CLs 10 Gs of land to Bimal Khasia and handed over possession thereupon. The said Bimal Khasia in pursuance of an agreement for sale handed over possession out of his purchased land to the plaintiff respondents in the year 1990. The plaintiff respondent No. 2 constructed tin roofed shed over Ga schedule land to protect the agricultural produce. I t is pertinent to mention here that the total land which Bimal Khasia promised to sell to the plaintiff respondent No. 2 has been described in schedule Ka to Gha in the plaint. Later on Bimal Khasia sold out the said land to the plaintiff respondents vide registered sale deed No. 116 dated 20.01.1997 and transfer his title. The defendant appellant manufactured certain forged documents concerning the suit land in order to take forcible possession of the suit land and make criminal trespass on 30.10.1997 along with some other defendants. The plaintiff respondents resisted such action and during the scuffle, one of the sons of the plaintiff respondent No. 2 died and the said plaintiff respondent No. 2 along with other family members were injured. The plaintiff respondents lodged FI R at

    Page 2 of 9

    RSA 135/2004

    Algapur Police Station. The plaintiff respondents pleaded that the land described in schedule Ka, Kha and Ga of the plaint were transferred to one Ali Ahmed and another by way of registered sale deeds. So, the plaintiff...

To continue reading