Son appearing at court for years after father’s death

22 years ago, Jamat Ali from Manikganj had filed a case with the civil court asking for declaration of land ownership.

The court issued a decree against Jamat Ali in 2003 as he didn’t submit any records in support of land ownership. Jamat Ali appealed against the decree in 2004.

Months after months hearing dates are fixed for that appeal case and Jamat Ali appears. But, later he died 10 years ago and couldn't see the end of that appeal case. Afterwards Jamat Ali’s son Nurul Haque, 50, and brothers joined the case, but that appeal suit has not ended yet.

On 9 June, the current main plaintiff of the case, Nurul Haque, came to testify in court. He expressed frustration over the case for not being settled even after all these years.

Nurul said to Prothom Alo, “My father’s case got dismissed as he didn’t submit land-related records in the court. Later, he appealed through another lawyer. After his death, we became the plaintiffs. Hearing dates are given and we show up at the court but the case is not disposed.”

Nurul added, it costs him Tk 600 to 700 just to reach the Dhaka court from Manikganj’s Saturia. He has spent a lot of money on this case after his father’s death.

He said, “I am a farmer. Whatever I earn from farming, I support my family with it. It becomes difficult to continue the case.”

Jamat Ali was a farmer by profession. He was from Radhanagar village in Saturia upazila of Manikganj. His father’s name was Abdul Karim Byapari who was a farmer too.

It was claimed in that case that Abdul Karim had taken possession of 32 decimals of land from the zamindar of Baliati and it was recorded in his name.

After Abdul Karim’s death, his sons Jamat Ali and Fatik Ali took possession of the land and made the RS record of the land in their names.

It was also claimed in the case, in 1982 Jamat Ali became the owner of 47 decimals of land through purchase. But, 43 decimals of his land were mistakenly recoded in the name of the government.

In 1993, Jamat Ali exchanged 57 decimals of and. Later it was claimed that a cremation ground owns the land. Seeking declaration for the ownership of that land, Jamat Ali filed a civil case at the assistant judge’s court in Dhaka’s Dhamrai.

In that case, Jamat Ali said that the claim it was a government land was inaccurate. On the contrary, the defendants made the opposite claim.

The civil court stated in the decree that Jamat Ali’s father Abdul Karim claimed to take possession of the land from Baliati’s Zamindar. But, Jamat Ali didn’t submit any records, supporting that in court.

In addition, despite occupying the land after an exchange, no related deeds of that were produced in the court either. The plaintiff didn’t even submit the land purchasing deeds before the court.

Besides, Jamat Ali’s portion of the crematorium’s land has not been specified either.

The court added in the decree that the question of land ownership has to be proven through evidence first. Despite claiming to pay tax for the land, the records of that have not been submitted in the court.

However, no records were submitted on behalf of the defendants in support of government land either. And the decree states that the plaintiff is in possession of the disputed land. On this ground, the court dismissed Jamat Ali’s case.

Jamat Ali challenged the decree of the civil court. He appealed at Dhaka’s fourth additional district and session judge court in 2004.

According to the case, the court accepted Jamat Ali’s appeal for a hearing. Later the appeal court sought the documents from the lower court.

Till 20 April, the hearing in this case continued for 153 working days. The appellant party appeared in the hearing regularly whereas, the defendant party failed to do so.

On 2 March 2014, the appellants asked for a time extension. Against the backdrop of seeking time extension, the court said in an order a review of the case documents showed that it is a civil appeal case that dates back to more than a decade. The appellants ask for time extension, under various pretexts.

The court records state, during the hearing of the appeal case, a plea for an amendment to the case petition along with summoning records was filed in 2018 on Nurul’s behalf.

The court ordered the amendment to the petition if expenses are bared and it also summoned the case-related volume.

Regarding the delay in the trial of this appeal, Nurul's lawyer Ram Narayan Chowdhury said to Prothom Alo, the lower court dismissed Jamat Ali's case failing to submit the original documents of the case. The appellate court summoned the case volume from Manikganj.

Nurul's testimony was required to present some more ledgers and RS ledgers which, have been submitted. There was no judge in the court for a long time. The judge of the court was in charge of the acting judge. Due to various reasons, the hearing of the appeal has been delayed, he added.

On 9 June 2022, Nurul testified in the court. On that day, Nurul also presented the RS ledger and other related records to the court in support of land ownership.

As the case has remained pending for a long time, Nurul said, “We are common people. I don't understand loopholes of the law. My father filed the case for land ownership but his case was dismissed because of the lawyer’s mistake. Then he filed for appeal through another lawyer. However, he couldn’t be there to see the case being settled. I'm getting old too. I have no idea when the appeal will be disposed of.”

Standing on the court corridor Nurul added, “Whenever the lawyer asks me to come to the court, I leave my home after the Fajr prayers that day. The clock strikes 9:00am to 10am by the time I arrive at the court. Some of my father’s lands are still left. I cultivate them for survival. I don't know how many more years I’ll have to come to the court. All I want is the court to settle my appeal.”