Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 872 Gua
Judgement Date : 8 March, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010136272020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : RSA/114/2020
MD. ALTAF HUSSAIN
S/O- LATE YAKUB ALI, R/O- VILL.- CHAPRA, KITTE- KHADIMAN, P.O. AND
P.S. BADARPUR, DIST.- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM.
VERSUS
ASIQUE UDDIN MAZUMDAR AND 11 ORS.
S/O- SOIF UDDIN MAZUMDAR, VILL.- KHADIMAN, P.O. AND P.S.
BADARPUR, DIST.- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM.
2:MD. ANWAR HUSSAIN
S/O- LATE YAKUB ALI
R/O- VILL.- CHAPRA
KITTE KHADIMAN
P.O. AND P.S. BADARPUR
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
3:MD. AHMED HUSSAIN
S/O- LATE YAKUB ALI
R/O- VILL.- CHAPRA
KITTE KHADIMAN
P.O. AND P.S. BADARPUR
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
4:MOJIR UDDIN KHAN
S/O- LATE KHAN ABDUL BARI
R/O- VILL.- RAHATPUR
P.O. BHANGABAZAR
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/3
5:MD. MORTUZA HUSSAIN TAPADAR
S/O- HAZI ASADDAR ALI TAPADAR
R/O- VILL.- RAHATPUR
P.O. BHANGABAZAR
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
6:MD. ABDUL MANNAN MAZAR BHUIYAN
S/O- LATE AKLU MIAN MAZAR BHUIYAN
7:MD. EMAD UDDIN TAPADAR
S/O- LATE MUSSABIR ALI TAPADAR.
8:AFIA KHANAM CHOUDHURY
W/O- EMAD UDDIN TAPADAR
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL.- KHALA
P.O. MARJADKANDI
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
9:ABDUL KHALAM AZAD
S/O- LATE ABDUL MANNAN
10:ABU YUSUF @ MD. MAHABUB CHOUDHURY
S/O- BASIR UDDIN AHMED CHOUDHURY
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILL.- KHADIMAN
P.O. BADARPURGHAT
DIST.- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM.
11:MUSSTT. MORIOM KHATUN
D/O- LATE YAKUB ALI
W/O- LATE MOINUL HAQUE
R/O- VILL.- LATIMARA
P.O. CHERAGI BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM.
12:MUSSTT. REJIA KHATUN
D/O- LATE YAKUB ALI
W/O- MORTUZA HUSSAIN
R/O- GHANIALA
P.O. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P CHOUDHURY
Page No.# 3/3
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 08.03.2021
Heard the learned counsel Mr. S. P. Choudhury, appearing for the appellant.
The present appeal is admitted for hearing on the following 2 (two) substantial questions of law.
i. Whether the impugned judgements and decrees of the Court below are based on misinterpretation of the evidences and documents on record and as such perverse?
ii. Whether the learned Court below had misinterpreted the provision of Section 114 of the Evidence Act by erroneously presuming the Ext. 2 & 3, the sale deeds exhibited by the plaintiff/appellant and without there being any contradictory oral and documentary has passed the impugned judgments and decrees which has vitiated the same.
Issue notice to the respondents.
The appellant shall take steps for service of notice on respondents by registered post with A/D as well as by other usual process.
Call for the LCR.
The appellant is allowed to raise any other substantial questions of law during the course of hearing.
List this matter after 4 (four) weeks.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!