Gauhati High Court
Md. Nurul Amin vs Md. Suruj Ali And 2 Ors on 6 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010161022025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/281/2025
MD. NURUL AMIN
S/O LATE AHAMMAD ALI, R/O VILL- KUPTIMARI, MOUZA- BHURAGAON,
DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM
VERSUS
MD. SURUJ ALI AND 2 ORS.
S/O LATE ABDUL GAFUR, R/O VILL- KUPOTIMARI, P.O.- BHURAGAON, P.S.-
BHURAGAON, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782121
2:MUST. SUFIA BEGUM
D/O LATE ABDUL GAFUR
R/O VILL- KUPOTIMARI
P.O.- BHURAGAON
P.S.- BHURAGAON
DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN-782121
3:BAHARUL ISLAM
S/O LATE ABDUL GAFUR
R/O VILL- KUPOTIMARI
P.O.- BHURAGAON
P.S.- BHURAGAON
DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN-78212
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R CHOUDHURY, MD. MEMON AHMED,MS. B. HAZARIKA
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
06.08.2025
Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has
challenged the order dated 19.06.2025, passed by the learned District Judge, Morigaon,
in Misc. J.(Transfer) Case No.01/2025, arising out of Title Suit No.36/2022 and Title Suit
No.56/2023. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 19.06.2025, the
learned District Judge, Morigaon, has transferred both the suits to the Court of learned
Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Morigaon.
3. Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
instituted one title suit, being Title Suit No.36/2022 and the same was pending before the
Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Morigaon, against 5 principal defendants and
22 proforma defendants, for a decree of declaration of plaintiff's right, title and interest
over the suit land, described in Schedule-A, and for recovery of possession, by
demolishing the construction of the defendants and for confirmation of possession and for
permanent injunction, and the said suit was pending at the stage of argument. The said
suit was proceeded ex-parte against all the principal defendants and proforma defendants
except proforma defendant Nos.3 and 12.
3.1 Thereafter, proforma defendant Nos.3, 4 and 9 being the sons and daughters of
late Abdul Gaffur, filed another suit, being Title Suit No.56/2023 before the Court of
learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Morigaon, against the petitioner as defendant No.1
along with three other principal defendants and proforma defendants for declaring right,
title and interest of plaintiff over Schedule-A land and for preliminary decree to effect
partition of the plaintiff's share by metes and bounds and to deliver possession of the
Page No.# 3/4
same to them and the said suit was pending at the stage of written statement and the
petitioner has not yet filed a written statement there.
3.2 Ms. Choudhury also submits that thereafter, the respondents herein had filed a
petition, being Petition No.18/2025, under Section 24 read with Section 151 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the learned District Judge, Morigaon, upon which the
learned District Judge, Morigaon has registered Misc. J.(Transfer) Case No.01/2025, for
transfer of both the aforementioned suits to one Court stating that the suit lands of both
the suits are same and both the suits are necessary to determine by the same Court
jointly by separate, independent judgment on the same day. The learned District Judge,
Morigaon, after hearing both the parties and considering the pleadings, and oral objection
from the side of the petitioner, allowed the Misc. J. (Transfer) Case No.01/2025, vide
impugned order dated 19.06.2025, on the ground that though the transfer was allowed,
but both the suits will be decided independently by two separate judgments.
4. Ms. Choudhury further submits that the impugned order, so passed by the learned
District Judge, Morigaon, suffers from manifest illegality on the ground that the suit
instituted by the petitioner is pending at the stage of judgment and the suit is triable by
the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and it is within the limits of pecuniary jurisdiction of
the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), whereas the Title Suit No.56/2023, instituted by the
respondents herein is triable by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) as per pecuniary
limits of jurisdiction. Secondly, Ms. Choudhury submits that besides the pecuniary
jurisdiction, the prayer being made in both the suits are also different while in the Title
Suit No.56/2023 the prayer is also made for partition of the suit, which is not there in the
Title Suit No.36/2022.
5. Ms. Choudhury further submits that since the case pending in the Court of learned
Civil Judge (Jr. Division) is transferred to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division),
the petitioner would loss one appellate forum and that both the suits are pending in
different stages, while Title Suit No.36/2022 is pending at the stage of judgment and the
other suit is pending at the stage of S/R and written statement and as such, the petitioner
Page No.# 4/4
herein will suffer serious prejudice and therefore, it is contended to set aside the
impugned order passed by the learned District Judge, Morigaon.
6. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully
gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and I find substance in
the submission of Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. It appears that the Title Suit No.36/2022, is pending at the stage of judgment,
whereas the title suit, being Title Suit No.56/2023, is pending at the stage of service
report and W/S. Further, as per pecuniary jurisdiction, the Title Suit No.36/2022 is triable
by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), whereas the Title Suit No.56/2023 is triable by
the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division). It also appears that the prayer being made in both
the suits are different, although the dag number and patta number of the suit land is
same. The parcel of land, involved in the Title Suit No.56/2023, is however more than the
land involved in the Title Suit No.36/2022. It also appears that the learned Civil Judge (Sr.
Division) is the appellate forum for the petitioner herein in Title Suit No.36/2022 and since
the case is withdrawn and transferred to the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Sr.
Division), Morigaon, the petitioner would loss one of the appellate forum.
8. In view of above, this Court is of the view that the impugned order so passed by
the learned District Judge caused serious prejudice to the petitioner and as such, the
same fails to withstand the legal scrutiny and accordingly, the same stands set aside and
quashed. Consequently, the learned Trial Courts, in both the suits, shall proceed to
dispose of the same in accordance with law.
9. In terms of above, this civil revision petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- Robin Phukan
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
