RSA 116/2004. Gauhati High Court
| Case Number | RSA 116/2004 |
| Judgement Date | March 30, 2021 |
| Court | Gauhati High Court |
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH CoURT
(THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
RSA 116 of 2004
On the death of appellant No.1, his legal heirs.
1(i) Smti. Dipali Ram Dey.
1(ii) Sri Manabendra Dey.
1(iii) Sri Tapan Dey.
1(iv) Smti Binata Kar.
1(v) Smti Minata Deb
1(vi) Smti. Mamata Nandi.
1(vii) Smti. Sujata Paul
As per Hon’ble courts order dated 11.05.2015 passed in MC No.144/ 2015.
-
Sreemati Sipra Dey
W/ O- Late Banamali Dey.
-
Sri Manna Dey
S/ O- Late Banamali Dey
-
Sri Pikan Dey (Minor)
S/ O- Late Banamali Dey
Represented by his mother, No.2 Sreemati Sipra Dey.
-
On the death of appellant No.5 his legal heirs are appellant Nos. 1-4 vide Hon’ble Courts order dated 24.11.2004.
- Appellants/ Plaintiffs Versus-
-
Sri Pankaj Dey @ Balai Dey.
-
Sri Partha Dey
Both are sons of Late Sudhir Kumar Dey
-
Smt. Madhuri Dey
W/ O- Late Sudhir Kumar Dey.
-
Sreemati Ratna Rani Dey.
-
Sreemati Rita Rani Dey.
-
Sreemati Reba Rani Dey
Sl No.4-6 all are daughters of Late Sudhir Kumar Dey
RSA 116 of 2004
-
As per Lawazima court’s order dated 2.3.05 the name of legal heirs of respondent No.7 are:
7(a) Smti Shikani Dey
W/ O- Late Randhir Dey.
7(b) Smti. Shamonti Dey
D/ O- Late Ramdhir Dey.
7(c) Sri Rupak Dey (Minor)
S/ O- Late Randhir Dey.
All are resident of Charakuri, P.O- Karimganj Bazar
P.S & Dist- Karimganj
-
Sreemati Hena Rani Dey.
D/ O- Late Niranjan Dey.
Sl No. 1 to 8 all are resident of Vill- Charakuri
P.O, PS & Dist- Karimganj
-
Sreemati Himani Rani Dey
W/ O- Sri Kajal Dey.
R/ O- Vill- Sarisha
P.O, PS & Dist- Karimganj.
-
Sreemati Hitaishi Rani Paul
W/ O- Sri Pradip Paul
R/ O- Vill- Subash Nagar
P.O, PS & Dist- Karimganj.
-
Sri Surajit Dey.
-
Sri Biswajit Dey.
-
Sreemati Tapashi Dey.
-
Sreemati Tulshi Dey.
Sl No.11 to 14 all are sons and daughters of Late Niranjan Dey, R/ O- Vill- Charakuri, P.O, PS & Dist- Karimganj.
-
The State of Assam
Represented by Secretary Govt. of Assam, Revenue Department, Dispur, Guwahati-781006
-
The Deputy Commissioner,
Karimganj.
-
The Settlement Officer, Karimganj
P.O & Dist- Karimganj, Assam.
- Respondents/ Defendants
RSA 116 of 2004
BEfoRE
HoN’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
Advocate for the appellants Ms. B Sarkar
Advocate for the respondent Mr. U Das and Mr. P J Barman Date of hearing & Judgment: 30.03.2017
JUDGMENT AND oRDER
(CAV)
Heard Ms. B Sarkar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants. Also heard Mr. U Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondent and Mr. P J Barman, leaned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 15 to 17.
-
The appellants before this Court are the plaintiffs in Title Suit No.36/ 1990 in the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division No.1, Karimganj.
-
I nitially, the suit was filed against the present appellant/ defendant only. Later the Municipal Board, Dhubri represented by its Executive Officer was impleaded as defendant No.2. The plaintiffs/ appellants case in brief is that they are the owners and predecessors of the suit land described in the schedule of the plaint measuring 2 Kedars 3 Poas 2 jattis 6 pons relating to Dag Nos. 43, 65 and 66 and the Southern part of Dag No.57 of Khatian No.142. The homestead of the plaintiffs/ appellants is also situated over the suit land which they have been possessing by constructing dwelling houses, a tank since the time of their forefathers. Plaintiff/ appellants also constructed a portion of boundary wall on the South-Western portion of their suit land. The defendant/ respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in collusion with 4, 5 and 6 attempted to demolish the said wall in existence by force thereby disturbing their possession over the suit land. Under such circumstances, the plaintiff/ appellants filed
RSA 116 of 2004
the suit for declaration of their right, title and interest and confirmation of possession over the suit land.
-
The defendant/ respondent Nos. 1 to 3 some of whom were substituted by their respective legal heirs on their death pleaded their defence that they have no claim over the land covered by Dag Nos. 65, 63 and 43 but so far Dag No.57 is concerned, the same is a public path which they have been using since time immemorial. The said path runs North-South wise direction and connects a public path on the East. I t is also pleaded by the defendant/ respondent Nos. 1 to 3 that during settlement operation of the said North-South wise path was recorded under Dag No. 57 and the East-West path Dag No.67 and also the final khatian was issued in that respect.
-
The defendant/ respondent No.15, 16 and 17 in the present appeal, who were the defendant Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in the Title Suit also submitted in their written statement...
To continue reading
Request your trial