IN THE COURT OF JOINT DISTRICT JUDGE, GAZIPUR
Title Suit No. 206/1010Shakur Mahamud…………….PlaintiffVersus
Written Statement on behalf of the defendant .
The defendant most respectfully-
1. That there is no cause of action for the suit & the suit is liable to set aside.
2. That the suit is not maintainable in the present form & manner.
3. That the suit is barred by the principles of estoppels, waiver & acquiescence.
4. That the suit is barred by law of limitation.
5. That the suit is not maintainable according to section 8 of the Specific Relief Act.
6. That the plaintiff is not the owner & and has no possession as well neither the plaintiff has ever possession of the suit land.
7. That the statements made in paragraph 2, 4 & 5 are the subject of records so the burden of proof lies upon the plaintiff.
8. That the statements made from paragraph 2-10 are false, frivolous & vicious & denied by this defendant.
9. That the facts on behalf of this defendant are as follows:
a) That Mr. Abdul Awal was the C.S recorded no. 1066 tenant of 63 decimals area of land of dag no. 152. Mr. Abdul Awal alienated 33 decimals of land of dag no. 152 to the defendant by a deed of exchange dated 16 December, 1991 bearing no. 8245. The defendant was also inducted into the possession of 33 decimals of land of dag no. 152.
b) That the defendant mutated the said 33 decimals of land in his own name and also paid rent to the Govt. in respect of the land in dispute.
c) That the defendant has been possession of the suit land for more than 12 years through his barghadar Aziul Islam & his servant Ferzena Sultana. Azizul Islam cultivates 27 decimals of land out of 33 decimals of the suit land and Ferzena Sultana care taking a pond in 6 decimals of land out of 33 decimals of suit land.
d) That the suit land has been recorded in the name of the defendant in the recent field R.S record bearing dag no. 160.
e) That the plaintiff has no right, title and interest over the suit land but filed this suit on false, frivolous and vexatious ground just to harass the defendant.
Wherefore it is prayed that your honour would be pleased to dismiss the suit with explanatory cost against the plaintiff.
Verified at Dhaka this 01 of January, 2011 that the contents of para1-9 are true to the best of my
knowledge & belief.