Case Details

Citation(s)
1961 SLG 515 1961 SLD 515 = 1961 PLD 844

Second Appeal Nos. 25 of 1959, decided on 20th June 1960.
Hasan, J

SAYEDUR RAHMAN MOLLA AND ANOTHER-Appellants

VERSUS

ABDUR RAHMAN AND OTHERS-Respondents

Law:

Section:

This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 2 nd Court, Comilla, permitting the plaintiff to withdraw a snit with liberty to institute a fresh suit on the same cause of action   The plaintiff-respondent instituted a suit out of which the present appeal has arisen, for declaration of his title to and confirmation of possession in the suit land and, in the alternative for recovery of khas possession if the defendants be found in possession of the said land. The suit was contested by some of the defendants denying the plaintiff's title to and possession in the disputed hand. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding, inter alia, that the suit was not maintainable in its present form; that the description of the suit properties was wrong, vague and indefinite; that the suit was bad for defect of parties; that the suit was also barred by limitation: and that the plaintiff could not establish his title to the suit land. The lower Appellate Court agreed with the findings of the trial court that the description of the suit land was vague and inaccurate and that the suit was not maintainable in its present form, but it set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and permitted the plaintiff to with draw the suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit on the same cause of action, if not otherwise barred, with a condition precedent that the plaintiff was to pay Rs. 20 to the contesting defendants. Hence the present appeal at the instance of defendants Nos. 4 and 9.   Mr. Syed A. N. M. Nasiruddin, the learned Advocate for the appellants, contends that the permission granted by the learned Subordinate Judge to withdraw the suit and to bring a fresh suit on the same cause of action, is not in accordance with law. In support of his contention the learned Advocate has argued that the question as to whether the description of the suit properties is vague and indefinite is a question that goes to the very root of the case and, as such, the order of the learned Sub ordinate Judge permitting the plaintiff to withdraw the suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit on the same cause of action is not an order as contemplated by…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register