Ranjit Baruah vs Smt. Ghato Gohain
2022 Latest Caselaw 2383 Gua

                                                                             Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010116882022




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

                                  Case No. : CRP/63/2022

            RANJIT BARUAH
            S/O. LT. ANANDA BARUAH, R/O. JORIGURI GAON, P.O. AND P.S. BONGURI,
            DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125.



            VERSUS

            SMT. GHATO GOHAIN
            W/O. LT. GANESH GOHAIN, R/O. LAJUM PATHAR, P.O. AND P.S.
            KAKOPATHAR, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125.



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S CHAMARIA

Advocate for the Respondent :

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

19.07.2022 Heard Mr. K. N. Sarma, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders dated 30.04.2022 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.51/2020 as well as Misc. (J) Case No.50/2020.

Page No.# 2/2

A perusal of the impugned orders shows that vide the order dated 30.04.2022 in Misc.(J) Case No.51/2020, the Court had condoned the delay of 100 days in filing an application for condonation of delay in making a prayer for substitution of legal representatives of the plaintiff No. 2. Further to that, vide the order dated 30.04.2022 in Misc. (J) Case No.50/2020, the Court substituted the legal representatives of the plaintiff Nos. 2.

Taking into account the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra (Dead) by Lrs. and Others vs. Pramod Gupta (Smt) (Dead)

by Lrs. and Others, reported in (2003) 3 SCC 272, and more particularly, the paragraph No. 26, this Court is of the opinion that no interference is required to the orders impugned in the instant proceedings, and more so, in a proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Consequently, the instant petition stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant