Sant Lal Minda vs Smti. Daxa Vyas And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 1600 Gua

                                                                        Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010076892022




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

                                 Case No. : CRP/46/2022

            SANT LAL MINDA
            S/O LATE KANHAIYA LAL MINDA, C/O RAJKAMAL, HB ROAD, FANCY
            BAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001

            VERSUS

            SMTI. DAXA VYAS AND ANR
            W/O DHIMENDRA VYAS, R/O YAQOOB MANZIL, 3RD FLOOR, HB ROAD,
            FANCY BAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001

            2:SHOBHAN VYAS
             S/O LATE RATILAL VYAS
             R/O YAQOOB MANZIL
             3RD FLOOR
             HB ROAD
             FANCY BAZAR
             GUWAHATI-78100

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S P ROY

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A SATTAR

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA 12-05-2022

Heard Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Z. Mukit, learned counsel for the respondents.

This petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Page No.# 2/3

Procedure, read with Section 151 of the said Code against the judgment and decree dated 29.03.2022 passed in T.A. No.1/2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, affirming the judgment and decree dated 7.12.2018 passed in T.S. No.75/2011 by the learned Munsiff No.1, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati.

Perused the petition and the annexures furnished therewith including the impugned judgments.

The appeal is admitted.

Call for the LCR.

Issue notice.

Since the respondents/caveators are represented by Mr. Z. Mukit, learned counsel, no formal notice need be issued.

The caveat stands discharged.

Also heard Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner on the prayer for stay of the operation of the impugned judgments.

Mr. Mukit, learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently resisted such prayer during the course of his submission and has referred to various materials on record. However, Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to various materials has also referred to the evidence of P.W. 1 to justify his submission for stay of the operation of the impugned judgments.

On consideration of the entire materials placed before this Court and upon hearing the respective learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that while the new building is constructed over the disputed Page No.# 3/3

premises/land, a commercial room/space would be kept without any use by the landlord or letting out to anybody else until disposal of this petition.

Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that within six months he will be vacating the suit premises and, thereafter, the respondents would be able to construct the building.

List this matter in the second week after the ensuing summer vacation.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant