Abdul Aziz Sk. & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4015 Cal

30.07.2021

RP

SAT 47 of 2016

(Via Video Conference) r

Abdul Aziz Sk. & Ors.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Bidyut Banerjee, sr. adv.

Ms. S. Sarkar, adv.

.... For appellant

Mr. Banerjee, learned senior advocate

appears on behalf of substituted appellants, whose

predecessor-in-interest was plaintiff in the suit. He

submits, his client relied on Amalnama. Lower

appellate Court disregarded the document, marked

exhibit 6 in the suit, as inadmissible in evidence.

Said Court relied on provisions in Transfer of Property

Act, 1882 and Registration Act, 1908. He relies on a

Division Bench judgment of this Court in B.P. Nandy

Chowdhury vs. H.C. Dutta reported in 71 CWN 681,

paragraph 4.

Trial Court in its judgment dated 29th June,

1992 found, plaintiff did not file any Amalnama

before the Court. It said, inter alia, as follows:-

"The plaintiff has adduced exhibit No.6

and 6(a) to 6(e) to prove his title to the

suit land. Regarding exhibit No.6

Learned advocate for the plaintiff

submitted that it is a receipt for

payment of Rs.71/- as nazar money to

the ex-landlord."

Lower appellate Court did not set aside said

finding. It said, in that context, inter alia, as follows:-

"Ext.-6, I run the risk of repetion, is

claimed by the plaintiff as Amal Nama.

It appears that if that claim is accepted

for arguments' sake then too Ext.6

reflects that it was an Amal Nama on

payment of yearly rent for using the

land in question for agricultural

purpose, and since the same is not

registered as required U/s. 17(1)(d0 of

the Registration Act the same has

become inadmissible in evidence."

Keeping above fact in mind we find in B.P.

Nandy Chowdhury (supra) view taken was not that

Amalnama is not compulsorily registrable. In

adjudicating the case before it, the Court said, inter

alia, as follows:-

"In my opinion, the documents in the

present case are not of that nature,

although called Amalnamas. For

example the one by which the lady got

her mourashi mokurari interest is in the

form of a patta and kabuliyat. I do not

think that it is necessary to decide in

this case as to whether these particular

documents are Amalnamas and require

registration."

In view of aforesaid, we do not find any

substantial question of law arises for formulation and

admission of the appeal.

SA 47 of 2016 is dismissed.

(Arindam Sinha, J.)

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)