Gauhati High Court
Lakheswar Mahato vs Gangadhar Panda @ Gangadhar ... on 5 August, 2023
Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010117202023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : RSA/128/2023
LAKHESWAR MAHATO
W/O LATE LAKSHMI NARAYAN MAHATO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
KANAKPUR PART II, PO KANAKPUR EAST, PS LAKHIPUR, DIST CACHAR,
ASSAM 788103
VERSUS
GANGADHAR PANDA @ GANGADHAR PANDEY AND ORS
S/O LATE MADHUSUDAN PANDA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR, PO JAIPUR, RAJABAZAR, PS AND
PH. LAKHIPUR, DIST CACHAR, ASSAM 788017
2:SRI KANU DEV
S/O LATE HAJANI DEV
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
3:ON THE DEATH OF CHITTA SUKLABAIDYA
HIS LEGAL HEIR SMTI. MALATI SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
4:SMTI MANJU SUKLABAIDYA
Page No.# 2/7
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
5:SMTI. MITHU SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
6:SMTI CHAMPA SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
7:SMTI. NANDA SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
8:SMTI MOUSUMI SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
9:SMTI. SUPRIYA SUKLABAIDYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
10:SMTI. MAYA SUKLABAIDYA
Page No.# 3/7
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
11:ON THE DEATH OF GAURANGA DEY
HIS LEGAL HEIR SMTI
MANJU DEY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
12:SRI KANCHAN DEY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
13:UTTAM DEY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
14:SRI SANKAR DEY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
15:SRI GOPI DEY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
Page No.# 4/7
16:ON THE DEATH OF JNANENDRA CHANDRA PAUL
HIS LEGAL HEIR SRI JIBESH PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAIPUR RAJABAZAR
BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
17:SRI DIPAK PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAIPUR RAJABAZAR
BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
18:SRI DIBAKAR PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAIPUR RAJABAZAR
BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
19:SRI JHANTU PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAIPUR RAJABAZAR
BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
20:SMTI MOUSHUMI PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAIPUR RAJABAZAR
BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
21:SMTI MANJU RANI PAUL
Page No.# 5/7
RESIDENT OF MALUGRAM SILCHAR TOWN
PO AND PS SILCHAR DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788002
22:SMTI MAMATA PAUL
RESIDENT OF MAIBONG BAZAR
PO MAIBONG
DIST NC HILLS ASSAM 788831
23:SMTI MALABIKA PAUL @ MANNA DEY
RESIDENT OF TARAPUR
ASSAMESE BASTI
PO TARAPUR
PH BARAKPUR
PS SILCHAR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788003
24:SMTI. MONISHA PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
25:SMTI SABITRI PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 788017
26:SRI KAJAL PAUL @ CHAPAL PAUL
S/O LATE KAILASH PAUL
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NUTUN BAZAR
PO JAIPUR
RAJABAZAR
PS AND PH. LAKHIPUR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 78801
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B J GHOSH
Advocate for the Respondent :
Page No.# 6/7
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
05.08.2023
Heard Mr. B. J. Ghosh, learned counsel representing the applicant.
The appeal is admitted upon the following substantial questions of law:
1. Whether the findings of both the learned trial court as well as appellate
court below in issue no. 5 is sustainable in view of the admission of
execution of Exihibit-3 and 4 by the defendant no. 1 and findings that the
boundary of exhibit-3 and 4 are different and there are different in quantum
of land as per exihibit-4 and exihibit-1 and 2 and thus the learned courts
below failed to exercise its jurisdiction under section 26 of the Specific Relief
Act, 1963?
2. Whether the findings of both the learned trial court as well as appellate
court below in issue no. 5 is sustainable in view of the admitted facts that
through exihibit-4, the defendant no. 1 sold his land only in favour of the
appellant/plaintiff covered by Dag No. 34 of RS Patta No. 7 and Dag No. 33
of RS Patta No. 6 as an owner and rectification of Exihibit-4 was prayed for
in respect of land belongs to defendant no. 1 only and no relief has been
claimed against other co-pattadars the suit is bad for non-joinder of other
co-pattadars?
3. Whether the findings of both the learned trial court as well as appellate
court below in issue no. 6 is sustainable in view of the evidence on record
and findings in issue no. 7 that defendants has no claim over the land and
houses standing thereon in respect of land transferred vide Sale Deed dated
04.12.1995 which includes land and structure of Schedule 8 land?
4. Whether the learned appellate court below ought to have remanded the
suit under Order 41 Rule 23 A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as the
Page No.# 7/7
findings of the trial court below was perverse and based on misreading of
evidence of record?
5. Whether the findings of the learned appellate court below suffer from
perversity and based on mere surmises and conjectures without proper
application of mind and thus failed to exercise its jurisdiction conferred
under Order 41 Rule 33 in right perspective?
6. For that in any view of the matter the impugned judgment and decree
passed by the both the court below is bad in law and liable to be quashed.
Issue Notice.
Appellant shall take steps for service of notice on the respondent by
registered post with A/D and other usual process.
Call for the LCR.
List after four weeks.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
