Syed Aminul Hussain vs Imran Ahmed
2025 Latest Caselaw 6829 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Syed Aminul Hussain vs Imran Ahmed on 29 August, 2025

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010188062025




                                                             undefined

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

                                  Case No. : RSA/147/2025

            SYED AMINUL HUSSAIN
            RESIDENT OF DHAI ALI, WARD NO. 2, SIVASAGAR TOWN, PO JOYRAGAR,
            PS AND DIST SIVASAGAR, ASSAM 785640



            VERSUS

            IMRAN AHMED
            SO LATE FAIJUDDIN AHMED, RESIDENT OF DEODHAR GAON,
            MORABAZAR, PO AND PS DEMOW, DIST SIVASAGAR, ASSAM 785662

            2:SRI JITU DAS
             S/O NANDI RAM DAS

            RESIDENT OF LAKHMONI GHAT
            PO NANGLAMARA
            PS NEMUGURI
            DIST SIVASAGAR
            ASSAM 785640

            3:SRI CHANDAN SAHU
             C/O FDM BRICK FIELD

            RESIDENT ATHABARI
            BANGALI GAON
            PO AND PS DEMOW DIST SIVASAGAR
            ASSAM 78566

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A R SHOME, R DEB

Advocate for the Respondent : ,
                                                                        Page No.# 2/3


                                  BEFORE
               HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

                                     ORDER

Date : 29.08.2025

Heard learned counsel Mr. A.R. Shome for the appellant, who has preferred an appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 27.06.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sivsagar in connection with Money Appeal No. 2/2020, reversing the judgment and decree 23.06.2020 passed by the learned Trial Court in connection with Money Suit No. 01/2018.

2. Appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law :-

1. Whether the finding of the learned Appellate Court on issue No. iii suffers from perversity while reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court as the defendants have admitted their signatures on Exhibit-1 and had not disputed that the Exhibit-1 is a notarized document?

3. Any other substantial question of law, if necessary, may be formulated in later stage.

4. Call for the Trial Court Records and the original record of the Appellate Court of first instance.

5. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.

6. List accordingly.

Page No.# 3/3

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant