Tridip Khanikar vs Rohan Kumari And 35 Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 8006 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Tridip Khanikar vs Rohan Kumari And 35 Ors on 4 November, 2024

                                                         Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010173172022




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

                              Case No. : RSA/158/2023

         TRIDIP KHANIKAR
         S/O-LATE BROJENDRA KUMAR KHANIKAR
         R/O-GOHAIN TEKELA GAON,
         P.O-CHANDOI TEKELA
         P/S AND DIST-JORHAT, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         ROHAN KUMARI AND 35 ORS.
         S/O-SUKHNATH KURMI,

         2:SRI. RAJEN RAJWAR.
          S/O- LATE ARJUN RAJWAR


         3:SRI. AMUS TANTI
          S/O-SANATAN TANTI

         4:SRI. PRAHLAD KALANDI
          S/O-LATE BISWAR KALANDI

         5:SRI. SUNIL KALANDI@ JALDHAR
          S/O-SRI. PRAHLAD KALANDI

         6:SRI. MUNKU JAISUWAR
          S/O- LATE DAYANANDA JAISUWAR

         7:SRI. DINA GARH.
          S/O-LATE SUKHRAM GARH

         8:SRI. MRIDUL MAHILI
          S/O-PUSPA MAHILI
                                    Page No.# 2/5



9:SRI. KHEDUWA MAHILI
 S/O- KHEDUA MAHILI


10:SRI. BOLRAM CHAWRA
 S/O-LATE BUDHURAM CHAWRA

11:SRI. PUNU NAYAK
 S/O- LATE DHANANJAY NAYAK

12:SRI. PRADIP BUDIA
 S/O-LATE HARICHARAN BUDIA

13:SRL. DURGA KANDA
 S/O- LATE ANTAJAMI KANDA

14:SRI. PARASURAM CHAWRA
 S/O-LATE LAXMAN CHAWRA

15:SRL. JULLYA PRAJA
 S/O-LATE KOLIYA PRAJA

16:SRI. BABA TANTI @ BIJOY TANTI
 S/O-LATE LABAN TANTI

17:SRI. RAJESH NAYAK
 S/O-LATE GADI NAYAK

18:SRI. KRISHNA CHOWRA
 S/O- BASU CHOWAR

19:SRI. GANESH TANTI
 S/O-LATE PARASHURAM TANTI

20:SRI. MANIK RABIDAS
 S/O-LATE BIKRAM RABIDAS

21:SRI. MONIRAM NAYAK
 S/O- LATE KANCHAN NAYAK

22:SRI. PUSUA NAYAK
 S/O- LATE MOTILAL NAYAK


23:SRI. PUSPA MAHILI
 S/O- LATE MAKHA NAYAK
                                Page No.# 3/5


24:SRI. KANU MAHALL
 S/O- LATE GUBIN MAHILI


25:SRI. DASARATH NAYAK
 S/O-DHANSING NAYAK

26:SRI. NAGA CHOWRA
 S/O-LATE PAKLU CHOWRA

27:SRI. ARO NAYAK

S/O-LATE MANGAL NAYAK

28:SRI. MONTU RAJWAR
 S/O- SRI. SAHADEV RAJWAR


29:SRI. SIVA MAHILI

S/O-LATE RAJESH MAHILI


30:SRI. AKALU CHAWAR
 S/O-SONTU CHAWAR

31:SRI. DIPAK CHOWAR
 S/O-LATE AJIT CHAWAR @ SISU


32:SMTI. RUPESWARI RAJAK
W/O-LATE MOHAN RAJAK

33:SMTI. RUMI CHOWAR
W/O-LATE GUNA CHOWAR

34:SRI. SUBOL RAJAK

S/O-LATE KESHAB RAJAK


35:SRI
 MUKASH KALANDI

S/O-LATE GOPESWAR KALANDI

36:SRI. PUNU NAYAK
                                                                                  Page No.# 4/5


             S/O- LATE JAYDHAR NAYAK
             ALL ARE RESIDENT OF HINDUBARI T.E

             P.O- TEOK
              P.S- TEOK
             DIST-JORHAT
             ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R ALI, MR A S SK,MR H A AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : ,




                                    BEFORE
                       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

                                           ORDER

04.11.2024

Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the appellant.

This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jorhat, in Title Appeal No.4/2019. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 14.06.2022, the learned Additional District Judge, Jorhat, has set aside the judgment and decree dated 08.11.2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jorhat, in Title Suit No.59/2017 and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.

Perused the memo of appeal and the grounds mentioned therein and also perused the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jorhat, in Title Appeal No.4/2019 and the judgment and decree dated 08.11.2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jorhat, in Title Suit No.59/2017.

This second appeal is admitted for hearing on the following substantial questions of law:-

Page No.# 5/5

(i) Whether in view of the evidence of the plaintiff and his document Exhibit-19, the learned First Appellate Court justified in dismissing the Title Suit No.59/2017 in absence of any written statement/denial of facts by the defendants to the plaint?

The record indicates that vide order dated 08.09.2023, notice has already been issued to the respondents.

Office note dated 04.10.2024 indicates that the respondent Nos.18 and 24 have already suffered demise and notice upon the respondent No.36 could not be served.

The learned counsel for the appellant shall take step to implead the legal representative of the respondent Nos.18 and 24 in the appeal and also take step upon respondent No.36 by registered post with A/D and also by usual process within a week from today.

Registry shall call for the record from the learned Courts below.

List the matter after 4(four) weeks.

Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE

Comparing Assistant