Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs Page No.# 2/3 on 10 June, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010182822023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : RSA/146/2023
BISWAJIT DEB AND 4 ORS.
S/O LATE SASHI MOHAN DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANGABAK PART II, PO AND PS KATLICHERA,
DIST HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
2: SMTI CHAMPA DEB
W/O SRI BISWAJIT DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANGABAK PART II
PO AND PS KATLICHERA
DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
3: MISS KOLI DEB
D/O SRI BISWAJIT DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANGABAK PART II
PO AND PS KATLICHERA
DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4: MISS KEYA DEB
D/O SRI BISWAJIT DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANGABAK PART II
PO AND PS KATLICHERA
DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5: MISS KONIKA DEB
D/O SRI BISWAJIT DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANGABAK PART II
PO AND PS KATLICHERA
DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSA
VERSUS
Page No.# 2/3
PARUL BALA DEB AND 3 ORS.
W/O LATE RABINDRA KUMAR DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANPUR PART II,PO AND PS KATLICHERRA, DIST
HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 788161
2:SRI RANJIT KUMAR DEB
S/O LATE RABINDRA KUMAR DEB
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANPUR PART II
PO AND PS KATLICHERRA
DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSAM 788161
3:SMTI JHUMA DEB
W/O JAHAR KANTI DEB
RESIDENT OF HAILAKANDI TOWN WARD NO. 5
PO
PS AND DIST HAILAKANDI
ASSAM 788151
4:SMTI JOLLY DASGUPTA
W/O SIDDARTHA DASGUPTA RESIDENT OF NETAJI LANE SILCHAR
PO AND PS SILCHAR
DIST CACHAR
ASSAM 78800
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GHOSH
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A H ALAMGIR (R-1,2,3 AND 4)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
10.06.2024.
Heard Shri SK Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellants, who has preferred
this second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC against the judgment and
decree dated 17.06.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Hailakandi in Title
Appeal No.05/2021 dismissing the same by upholding the judgment and decree
dated 29.04.2021 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Hailakandi in Title Suit
No. 09/2017.
Page No.# 3/3
It is submitted that the suit itself had projected the present appellants-
defendants as tenants and the area in question is outside the purview of the
Urban Areas Rent Control Act. Amongst others, it is contended that there is
violation of the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
as there was no notice issued at any point of time.
The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:
Whether the learned Courts below erred in law in allowing the suit
of the plaintiffs without considering the provision of Section 106 of
the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?
This Court may frame any other substantial questions of law at the time of
hearing with notice to the respective parties.
Call for the records.
Shri AK Purkayastha, learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice on
behalf of all the respondents.
Let extra copy of the memo of appeal along with annexures be served upon
Shri Purkayastha, learned counsel within 3 days.
List this case after 6 weeks along with report on receipt of records.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
