GUWAHATI, India, Sept. 19 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Aug. 20:

1. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :

(1) Whether the learned appellate Court was right in holding that the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable?

(2) Whether the learned appellate Court erred in law without formulating any point for determination or without discussing any evidence on record in the appeal in accordance with Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908?

(3) Whether the learned appellate Court was right in holding that the Exhibit - 1 (Sale Deed) is inadmissible in evidence?

2. The appellant Md. Julhaz Ali was the plaintiff who brought up Title Suit No. 13/2014 against the defendants No. 1. Golesha Bewa, 2. Md. Mazibar Rahman and 3. Md. Asgar Ali. 17 (Seventeen) proforma defendants were also arrayed in the suit. Title Suit No. 13/2014 was for a decree for recovery of khas possession and permanent injunction.

3. A parcel of land ad measuring 1 Katha appertaining to P.P. No. 139 under Dag No. 318 of village - Kamarpara under Pachim Sialmari Mouza, described in Schedule A of the plaint, was purchased by the plaintiff on 04.05.2005 vide registered Sale Deed No. 23 and his name was mutated in the land records. Thereafter, the plaintiff acquired right, title and interest and was in continuous possession of the aforementioned land.

4. It is contended that the plaintiff had earlier filed Title Suit No. 162/2013 before the Munsiff, Mangaldai for recovery of khas possession for land measuring 2 Bighas 2 Kathas 10 Lechas against the same defendants.

5. However, the defendants threatened the plaintiff with dire consequences and forcefully encroached into the present suit land on 06.02.2014. The plaintiff immediately went to the police station and thereafter to the court of the Executive Magistrate for relief.

6. It is further contended that the defendants trespassed into 15 lechas of their land abutting the roadside, out of one katha of land in front of the plaintiff's house, obstructing the plaintiff's path of ingress into and egress out of the plaintiff's land. Threatened by the defendant's assertive infringement, the plaintiff fled from his house along with his wife and children. The defendants raised concrete posts to construct a house right on the plaintiff's entrance. This impelled the plaintiff to file this suit for recovery of Khaas possession and permanent injunction along with prayer for prohibitory injunction for further construction and mandatory injunction to clear the entrance to the plaintiff's residential house. This parcel of land is described under the Schedule-B of the plaintiff. This suit proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as the defendants failed to file written statement within the period of limitation.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=eISc8sUCYnQFBVP%2BVeJCOHYuDs2WwdTGenLMHm0%2Bo6IaaoJ906uZ%2FX%2FY%2BSqmuqt2&caseno=RSA/388/2017&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010058502017&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.