2024 (8) TMI 1677

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egular Second Appeal No.74/2006, whereby the High Court had allowed the appeal preferred by the respondents - defendants, holding that the appellants - plaintiffs were not entitled to get the recovery of khas possession of the suit land by evicting the respondents - defendants therefrom. 2. The broad facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellants - plaintiffs had filed the Title Suit No.5/2002 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Barpeta seeking declaration with regard to the right, title and interest over the scheduled land and for evicting the respondents - defendants from the suit land in question, as also seeking permanent injunction. The said suit was contested by the respondents - defendants by filing th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her the annual patta holder has the right to transfer the land for which he has only possessory right to another person?"  6. Thereafter, the High Court again framed two additional substantial questions of law on 05-02-2015 which are as follows:- "1. In view of the admissions contained in Paragraph 4, 5 and 6 of the plaint, whether the defendants can be said to have acquired the status of non-evictable tenants under the Assam Temporary Settled Areas) Tenancy Act, 1971? 2. Whether the suit itself was not maintainable due to non-compliance of Section 51 and 54 of the Assam (Temporary Settled Areas} Tenancy Act, l971?" 7. Again, the High Court framed one additional substantial question of law on 25.03.2015, which r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty of hearing to the appellants, more particularly when the High Court had framed as many as four additional substantial questions of law, which were not raised by any of the parties before the Courts below. She further submitted that the respondents - defendants had claimed the ownership over the suit land by the adverse possession, and had not claimed tenancy rights over the same, however, the High Court has created a new case for the respondents - defendants by framing additional substantial questions of law and allowing the Second Appeal without giving any opportunity of leading the evidence on the additional issues framed by it. 10. Mr. Azim H. Laskar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has fairly submitted that the H....