Ajit Saikia vs Smt Rani Chutia And 3 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 314 Gua

                                                                Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010063912018




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

                                   Case No. : RSA/190/2018

            AJIT SAIKIA
            S/O LATE DEHIRAM SAIKIA
            R/O WARD NO 1 NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN
            MOUZA NAKARI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787001



            VERSUS

            SMT RANI CHUTIA AND 3 ORS
            W/O SRI GOBINDO RAJBONSHI
            R/O WARD NO 2 NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN
            MOUZA NAKARI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787001

            2:SRI BIDYADHAR SARMA
             S/O SRI NARENDRA SARMA
            R/O WARD NO 1 NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN
            MOUZA NAKARI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787001

            3:SMTI. BIMALA MOMING
            W/O LATE PIRISON MOMING
            R/O WARD NO 1 NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN
            MOUZA NAKARI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 78700

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. P S DEKA

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. T J MAHANTA (R1)
                                                                                               Page No.# 2/2




                                      BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                              ORDER

Date : --31.01.2022 Heard Mr. B.K. Bhagawati, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. P. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. This second appeal is admitted for hearing on the following substantial questions of law :- Whether the Courts below committed perversity by considering the exhibit 1 as admissible document in view of the provisoon of Transfer of property Act, 1882. The Indian Stamp Act 1899, and The Registration Act. 1908 it is clear that sale certificate Exhibit 1 is chargeable with stamp duty under article 18 read wit section 23 of Schedule 1 of the Stamp Act and absence of registration, the said document is not admissible in evidence but both the courts below failed to consider this important aspect of the matter and wrongly decreed the suit and dismissed the counter claim of the defendant ? Whether the decrees passed by then Courts below is sustainable in respect of entire mortgaged land although the auction sale in favour of the plaintiff was made "As is where basis" therefore the plaintiffs right is only on the basis of prevailing status of the land on the date of sale but not on the entire mortgage property ?

Whether the courts below failed to consider the exhibit "Kha", "Gha" and "Unga" in its proper perspective and thereby the impugned judgment is not sustainable in law ? The appellant shall be at liberty to raise any other substantial questions of law that may be formulated at the time of hearing.

Call for records.

Issue usual notice returnable by 6 weeks.

No formal notice need be sent to the respondents as the respondent No. 1 is represented by Ms. P. Bhattacharya, learned counsel and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had been struck of. However, extra copies of the appeal be furnished to the counsel for the respondent No. 1.

List the matter after 6 weeks.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant