AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Lodh, J
Heard Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. SB Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Mr. PS Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
Short facts are that, the respondents in this appeal being the original plaintiffs instituted a suit for declaration of their right, title and interest over the land described in schedule „B‟ of the plaint and also sought for recovery of khas possession.
Admittedly, the land of schedule „B‟ of the plaint is in possession of the appellants who were the original defendants in this suit. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs i.e. the respondents herein. The appellants being the defendants preferred first appeal before the court of learned District Judge, Kailasahar, North Tripura. The appeal was also dismissed. Hence, this appeal before this court under Section 100 of the CPC.
At the time of admission of this appeal following substantial question of law was formulated:-
“Whether an attorney under a Notarized Deed of Attorney is competent to execute a registered Sale Deed?”
Today the matter has been taken up for hearing. In course of hearing, it appears that the substantial question of law raised and formulated was not agitated by any of the parties before the learned courts below. Since the suit involves declaration of right, title, interest of the parties i.e. the plaintiffs/ respondents herein, the court has to decide whether the sale transaction was at all a valid transaction, as prescribed under the Transfer of Properties Act qua Registration Act. Since this question has not been agitated before the learned trial court, I deem it pertinent to remit the matter back to the learned trial court to decide this issue for the reason that the plaintiffs brought on record the sale deed in support of the plea of their acquisition of title by dint of the concerned sale deed.
Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the learned trial court to decide the following issue:
“Whether the sale deed no. I-1535 dated 31.05.1990 was a valid and legal transaction?”
While deciding this issue, if the learned trial court feels that fresh evidence is necessary over any of the issues or on all the issues already framed by the court, then, he may proceed accordingly as per law.
The parties are directed to appear before the court of learned trial judge on 23.09.2022.
In the meantime, Registry is directed to send the case record to the learned trial court.
With this observation, the instant appeal stands disposed.