Chandypore Tea Estate vs Devila Baspar
2022 Latest Caselaw 5159 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010227962022




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

                                  Case No. : RSA/196/2022

            CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE
            HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 23A-NEETAJI SUBASH ROAD, 8TH FLOOR,
            ROOM NO. 8, KOLKATA 1 AND CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF PRODUCTION,
            MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF TEA CHANDYPORE T.E , PO CHANDYPORE,
            PS ALGAPUR, DIST HAILAKANDI, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSTT.
            MANAGER, SANJAY DEY (44 YEARS) S/O SATISH CHANDRA DEY,
            RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 5, KARIMGANJ TOWN, PS AND DIST
            KARIMGANJ,


            VERSUS

            DEVILA BASPAR
            S/O LATE SUKLAL BASPAR,
            VILLAGE BASHBARI PART II, PO CHANDIPUR, DIST HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
            788150



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent :




                                   BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

                                         ORDER

22.12.2022 Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant.

This appeal under Section 100 of the C.P.C. has been preferred against the Page No.# 2/3

impugned Judgment and Decree, dated 20.07.2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Hailakandi in T.A. No. 12/2019, whereby the first appeal was allowed setting aside and reversing the Judgment and Decree, dated 21.05.2019, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Hailakandi in T.S. No. 30/2005.

The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law-

1. Whether the findings arrived at by the learned First Appellate Court is vitiated due to non-consideration of the provisions of Order III Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908?

2. Whether the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court is sustainable in law for not taking into consideration the direction given by this Court at the time of remanding the case earlier?

3. Whether the learned First Appellate Court committed wrong in reversing the Judgment and Decree of the learned trial Court only on the basis of the oral objections of the defendants/respondent who, in fact, failed to adduce any evidence in spite of being granted ample opportunities by the learned trial Court as per direction passed by this Court in RSA 92/2007?

The appellant is permitted to raise any other substantial question of law which may arise in course of hearing.

Issue notice. Steps be taken by registered post with A/D as well as by usual process within 5(five) days.

Call for the records.

List after 7(seven) weeks.

In the meantime, it is provided that till the returnable date, the operation of the impugned Judgment and Decree, dated 20.07.2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Page No.# 3/3

Hailakandi in T.A. No. 12/2019 shall remain stayed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant