Land Reforms Ordinance, 1984
On perusal of the oral and documentary evidences, it appears that as per the Rules of preponderance of evidence, the contention of the plaintiff’s possession is heavy in weight but the learned District Judge on slipshod statement held that the joint possession of the plaintiff and the defendants without sifting the documents in entirety. The original documents are lying with the plaintiff and produced from the custody of the plaintiff and those were admitted as evidence without any objection from the defendants’ side. The burden of showing that the alleged transfer is banami transaction has not been discharged by the defendants’ side. Undisputedly, the father of the defendants in his lifetime did not take any legal action against the transaction nor he filed any suit for declaration that the plaintiff was his benamder. Considering the surrounding circumstances, the relationship between the parties and intention and subsequent conduct of Naybullah Khan, it is as clear as daylight that 94 years ago, Naybyllah Khan took settlement of the suit land for the benefit of his eldest son i.e the plaintiff for the purpose of the welfare of his son. .....Mahmud N. A. Khan & ors Vs. Md. Kamrul Islam Khan & ors, (Civil), 19 SCOB [2024] HCD 165 ....View Full Judgment