Harsh Namula vs Banwarilal Sharma And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1633 Gua

                                                                Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010002392008




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

                                     SAO/2/2008

         HARSH NAMULA
         W/O SHRI AMARJEET NARULA R/O SEWDA COMPLEX K C CHOUDHURY
         ROAD
         CHATRIBARI
         GHY-8.


          VERSUS

         BANWARILAL SHARMA and ORS
         S/O SRI DURGA PRASAD SHARMA R/O SEWDA COMPLEX K C CHOUDHURY
         ROAD
         CHATRIBARI
         GHY-8.

         2:SMTI. KAMALA DEVI AJITSARIA

          3:SMTI. RENU SUREKHA AJITSARIA

          4:SMTI. LALITA AJITSARIA

          5:SMTI. INDIRA AGARWALLA

         6:SMTI. PINKI AGARWALLA
         NO. 2 IS THE WIFE AND NO. 3 TO 6 ARE DAUGHTERS OF LATE RUKANMAL
         AJITSARIA
         ALL ARE RESIDENT OF JAI NARAYAN ROAD
         FANCY BAZAR
         GUWAHATI- 1.
         7:SHRI RAJESH AGARWALLA
         SON OF SHRI SRILAL AGARWALLA RESIDENT OF SONAPUR SAW MILL
         VILLAGE and P.O.- SONAPUR
         DIST.- KAMRUP
         ASSAM.
                                                                         Page No.# 2/2

           ------------
           Advocate for : P K R CHOUDHURY
           Advocate for : MR.MD ASLAM appearing for BANWARILAL SHARMA and ORS



                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                      ORDER

Date : 13-05-2022

Heard Mr. P.K. Roy Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, appearing on behalf of the respondent.

Taking into consideration that the appeal filed against the original judgment and decree dated 25.09.2006 passed in T.S. No. 223/97 may not provide the appellant with the substantial relief, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant would like to withdraw the instant appeal without prejudice to his rights to resort to the appropriate provisions of law.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court, on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, permits the appellant to withdraw the instant appeal. The withdrawal of the instant appeal, however, shall not preclude the appellant to resort to such provisions of law as is permissible under law.

The Appeal accordingly stands disposed off.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant