CRP 464/2015. Gauhati High Court

Case NumberCRP 464/2015
Judgement DateFebruary 27, 2021
CourtGauhati High Court

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

CRP No. 464 of 2015

MD. NAZRUL HAQUE & 9 ORS. …..Petitioners

Vs.

MUSSTT. NEKJAN BIBI ..…Respondent

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

Advocates for the Petitioners : Mr. B. Ullah, Mr. A. Rahman

Advocates for the Respondent : Mr. B. Hussain, Mr. P. B. Mazumder,

: Ms. R. Borgohain,

Date of hearing : 27.02.2017 Date of Judgment and Order : 27.02.2017

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (Oral)

Heard Mr. B. Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent.

2) By filing the present application under section 115 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil as well as under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 29.07.2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Kamrup (Rural), Amingaon in TS 268/14. The sole had defendant had expired during

CRP No. 464 of 2015 Page

the pendency of the suit and by the said order impugned herein, the substitution petition filed by the respondent- plaintiff was allowed.

3) Earlier, the suit was proceeding before the Court of Civil Judge No.2, Guwahati, where it was registered as TS No. 131/06. In course of time, Civil Courts were established in the newly created District of Kamrup (Rural) at Amingaon and the suit was re-registered as T.S. No. 268/14. In the said suit, the PW-1 was examined and the evidence was closed. On 25.09.2007, the predecessor-in- interest of the present petitioners, who was the sole defendant in the suit had also filed his Evidence-On-Affidavit as well as Evidence-on- affidavit by his other witnesses. On the same day, the respondent's side had filed a petition praying for review of the previous order dated

21.08.2007 passed in the suit with a prayer to allow the predecessor-in-interest of the respondent herein to examine further two witnesses. Together with the said petition, two evidence-on- affidavit by PW-2 and PW-3 were also filed. The said review petition dated 25.09.2007 was allowed by order dated 05.04.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.2, Guwahati. The predecessor-in-interest of the present petitioners had preferred an appeal against the said order dated 05.04.2008, which was also dismissed by the Court of learned District Judge, Guwahati by order dated 05.12.2008 passed in misc. Appeal No. 7/2008. Thereafter the predecessor-in- interest of the present petitioners challenged the said order dated 05.12.2008 before this Court by filing CRP No. 53/2009.

4) During the pendency of the said CRP No. 53/2009, by an order dated

20.03.2009, the further proceedings of TS 131/06 was stayed by order dated 20.03.2009. However, as during the pendency of the said revision, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners, who was the sole petitioner therein had died on 21.11.2009. Accordingly, the present petitioners along with one Mrs. Sabila Khatun had filed a substitution application before this Court and accordingly, the name of the petitioners along with the said Mrs. Sabila Khatun was substituted by virtue of order dated 17.02.2010 passed by this Court in M.C. No. 340/10. The substituted petitioner No.1 in CRP No. 53/2009 also

CRP No. 464 of 2015 Page

died on 07.02.2010 and accordingly, her name was stuck off by order dated 30.03.2010 passed by this court in MC 633/10.

5) Later on, the said CRP No. 53/09 came to be dismissed by this court by order dated 30.10.2014, with a direction to the learned trial court to dispose the suit preferably within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of the records. The parties were directed to appear before the learned trial court on 20.11.2014.

6) After the proceedings of T.S. No...

To continue reading

Request your trial