Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs Abdur Rahim And 4 Ors on 14 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010172232025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2520/2025
NURUL ISLAM AND 2 ORS.
S/O. LT. MUSLEMUDDIN AHMED
2: NASIR UDDIN
S/O. LT. MUSLEMUDDIN AHMED
3: FARIDA BEGUM
W/O. LT. MUSLEMUDDIN AHMED
ALL ARE R/O. VILL.- AMBARI
MOUZA-GHILAZARI
P/O. BARPETA
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
VERSUS
ABDUR RAHIM AND 4 ORS.
S/O. SHOMESH UDDIN R/O. AMBARI, MOUZA- GHILAZARI, P/O. AND DIST.
BARPETA, ASSAM
2:PRADIP KUMAR NATH
S/O. GOPAL NATH
R/O. NATH HOTEL
HOWLY TOWN
WARD NO. 2
MOUZA-GHILAZARI
P/S. AND DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
3:AJIT KUMAR NATH
S/O. GOPAL NATH
R/O. NATH HOTEL
HOWLY TOWN
WARD NO. 2
Page No.# 2/3
MOUZA-GHILAZARI
P/S. AND DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
4:KISHORE KUMAR NATH
S/O. DHARANI NATH
R/O. TARANI DAS COMPLEX
HOWLY TOWN
WARD NO. 4
MOUZA-GHILAZARI
P/S. AND DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
5:GITAMONI NATH
W/O. KISHORE KUMAR NATH
R/O. TARANI DAS COMPLEX
HOWLY TOWN
WARD NO. 4
MOUZA-GHILAZARI
P/S. AND DIST. BARPETA
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M GOGOI, MR. S U AHMED,MR. N DEKA,MR M AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : , H G DAISY,R BEGUM,MS A HUSSAIN,FOR CAVEATOR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
14.08.2025
Heard Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. J. Ahmed,
learned counsel for the opposite parties.
2. This application, under Order XLI Rule 5 read with Order XXXIX Rules 1
and 2 of the CPC, is preferred by the applicants for staying the operation of the
judgment and decree dated 15.07.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Barpeta (first appellate court hereinafter), in Title Appeal No.
42/2024.
Page No.# 3/3
3. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the connected
appeal has already been admitted by this court and notice has been issued to
the respondents/opposite parties herein and the record has also been called for.
But, in the meantime, the respondents/opposite parties herein have instituted
one execution proceeding, being Title Execution Case No. 39/2025 and as such,
there is a requirement of staying the operation of the impugned judgment and
decree dated 15.07.2025, till disposal of the connected appeal.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite parties,
however, opposed the petition.
5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I
have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on
record.
6. It appears that the connected appeal has already been admitted for
hearing, after framing of substantial questions of law and the record has also
been called for and as such, there is a requirement of staying the operation of
the impugned judgment and decree dated 15.07.2025, passed by the learned
first appellate court, in Title Appeal No. 42/2024.
7. Accordingly, taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the
parties and also considering the facts and circumstances on the record, the
operation of judgment and decree dated 15.07.2025, passed by the learned first
appellate court, in Title Appeal No. 42/2024, stands stayed, till disposal of the
connected appeal, i.e. RSA No. 122/2025.
8. In terms of above, this interlocutory application stands closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
