High Court Division · Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Mohammad Asif v Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others
First Appeal 18/2018 · Appeal allowed; suit remanded for retrial · Decided 10 September 2026
The plaintiff sued the Government and others in Title Suit No. 245 of 2012 for a declaration of title to 6740 ajutansha of land and a declaration that its recording in City Survey Khatian No. 1 in the defendants' name was erroneous. He traced title from the C. S. recorded tenants through registered deeds to his purchase from Kazi Salahuddin. The Joint District Judge, 1st Court, Dhaka dismissed the suit on 15.06.2017, and the plaintiff appealed, also seeking amendment of the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17. The High Court Division held that the defendants had shown no basis for the City Survey Khatian, but a plaintiff must prove his own title. The R. S. Khatian recorded only 5868 ajutansha in Kazi Salahuddin's name and the plaint did not explain the difference. Finding that this error was made by the plaintiff's advocate, the Court set aside the decree and remanded the suit for retrial within six months, allowing both parties to amend their pleadings and adduce further evidence.
- Whether the Government defendants had to show the basis of a City Survey Khatian prepared in their name when its correctness was challenged.
- Whether a suit dismissed because of a defect in the plaint caused by the plaintiff's advocate should be remanded for retrial with leave to amend the pleadings.
- A khatian or record of right is not a document of title; it merely provides a presumption as to possession.
- When the correctness of a khatian is challenged in a competent court, the onus shifts to the person in whose name it stands to prove its basis.
- A record of right must be prepared in the names of the tenants, heirs or transferees of the immediately previous khatian, so the defendants had to show the basis of the City Survey Khatian in their name, which they failed to do.
- A plaintiff must prove his title independently and a suit cannot be decreed merely on the failure of the defendant to prove the defence case.
- A plaintiff should not be made to suffer for an error made by his advocate in preparing the plaint, so the suit was remanded for retrial with leave to both parties to amend their pleadings and adduce further evidence.
But when the correctness of a khatian is challenged in a competent Court the onus shifts on the person in whose name the khatian stands to prove the basis of the khatian.
