GUWAHATI, India, July 23 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on June 24:

1. Heard Mr. J. Laskar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. M. J. Quadir, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the respondents.

2. The instant Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'the Code') challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Court of the Civil Judge, Hailakandi (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned First Appellate Court') dated 24.02.2016 whereby the Title Appeal No.11/2015 was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Court of the Munsiff No.2, Hailakandi (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Title Suit No.87/2010 dated 17.07.2015 was affirmed.

3. It is seen that the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide the order dated 13.05.2016 had admitted the instant Appeal by formulating two substantial questions of law which being relevant is reproduced herein under:-

1. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is maintainable in view of bar under Section 154 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation Act, 1886 in view of absence of the prayer of declaration of title?

2. Whether the impugned judgments and decrees are vitiated for non-compliance of the provision of Order XX Rule 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure?

4. The question therefore arises as to whether the two substantial questions of law arise in the instant Appeal. In so far as the first substantial question of law, it pertains to as to whether the suit of the plaintiff was maintainable in view of the bar contained under section 154 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 in view of the absence of the prayer of declaration of title, in the opinion of this Court, does not arise at all taking into account that the plaintiff who is the respondent No.1 in the instant Appeal had sought for the relief for declaration of his title in respect to his share of the suit land as would be apparent from Clause (d) of the reliefs so sought for in the plaint. Therefore, the first substantial question of law cannot be said to be involved in the instant Appeal.

5. The second substantial question of law relates to as to whether the judgments passed by the learned Trial Court as well as the learned First Appellate Court stands vitiated for non-compliance with the provision of Order XX Rule 18 of the Code.

6. For the purpose of ascertaining the same, it is relevant to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of the instant Appeal.

7. For the purpose of convenience, the parties herein are referred to in the same status as they were before the learned Trial Court.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=7yg5D%2FmJmLJFbv9l4Wl3vfQ2FtGlvpJH8JyFGE9Xwrs4MMYcoaTPsg5DN0dYH7%2FQ&caseno=RSA/135/2016&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010111602016&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.