Divakar Bothra vs Ram Awatar Manihar
2022 Latest Caselaw 3838 Gua

                                                                      Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010101382022




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

                                Case No. : CRP(IO)/109/2022

            DIVAKAR BOTHRA
            S/O SRI DIPAK KUMAR BOTHRA, VILL-RUPAHI, MOUZA-KHATOWAL, P.S.-
            RUPAHIHAT, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            RAM AWATAR MANIHAR
            S/O SRI AMAR CHAND MAHESWARI, VILL- A.T. ROAD, MARWARIPATTY,
            P.O. AND P.S.-NAGAON, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. D MOZUMDER

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B C DAS




                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                         ORDER

Date : 27-09-2022

Heard Mr. C Gogoi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.C. Das, the learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. I Das, learned counsel for the respondent.

This is an application under Article 227 of the constitution Page No.# 2/2

challenging the order dated 17.03.2022 passed by the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Misc Case No.87/2015 and arising out of Title Suit No.23/2014 whereby the petition filed by the respondent herein under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay in filing the petition under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 08.07.2015 was allowed.

The Court of the first instance have after taking into consideration the facts have come to a finding that the respondent herein had sufficient cause for not preferring the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the code within the period of limitation.

It further appears from a perusal of the impugned order that the Court below by a detailed discussion have taken into account the said aspect of the matter and there appears to be no perversity in respect to such findings. Consequently, this court does not find this to be a fit case for interference under article 227 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

The interim order dated 01.06.2022 stands vacated and the parties are directed to appear before the Court below i.e., the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Tezpur on 09.11.2022.

The Registry shall forthwith return the LCR so that the Court below is in a position to take up the matter on 09.11.2022.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant