Gauhati High Court
Jogen Sarma @ Jogen Chandra Sarma @ ... vs Dhrubajyoti Sarma on 19 February, 2025
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010022862025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/55/2025
JOGEN SARMA @ JOGEN CHANDRA SARMA @ JOGENDRA CHANDRA
SARMA
S/O- LATE RABIDEV SARMA,
R/O- WARD NO. 6, TENGABARI,
MOUZA- CHAPAI,
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI,
DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM.
VERSUS
DHRUBAJYOTI SARMA
SON OF LATE HAREN SARMA,
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6, TENGABARI, MANGALDAI TOWN, MOUZA
CHAPAI , P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI, DARRANG, ASSAM
2:PANKAJ SARMA
SON OF LATE HAREN SARMA
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6
TENGABARI
MANGALDAI TOWN
MOUZA CHAPAI
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI
DARRANG
ASSAM
3:RENU DEVI
DAUGHTER OF LATE HAREN SARMA
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6
TENGABARI
MANGALDAI TOWN
Page No.# 2/5
MOUZA CHAPAI
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI
DARRANG
ASSAM
4:RITA DEVI
DAUGHTER OF LATE HAREN SARMA
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6
TENGABARI
MANGALDAI TOWN
MOUZA CHAPAI
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI
DARRANG
ASSAM
5:DHARANI SARMA
SON OF LATE HIREN SARMA
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6
TENGABARI
MANGALDAI TOWN
MOUZA CHAPAI
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI
DARRANG
ASSAM
6:KHAGEN SARMA
SON OF LATE HIREN SARMA
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 6
TENGABARI
MANGALDAI TOWN
MOUZA CHAPAI
P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDAI
DARRANG
ASSA
For the petitioner (s) : Mr. C. Goswami, Advocate
For the respondent (s) : XXX
Page No.# 3/5
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
19.02.2025
Issue notice making it returnable on 02.04.2025.
2. Steps be taken upon the respondent by way of registered
post with A/D as well as through usual process within 3 (three)
days.
3. The petitioner is further directed to effect service upon the
respondent by way of dasti routed through the Registry of this
Court and file an affidavit of service on or before the next date.
4. The case of the petitioner herein is that in the plaint of Title
Suit No.23/1977, the correct Patta Number was mentioned being
P.P.No.39. However, in the judgment and decree so drawn up,
there was a mistake whereby the Periodic Patta Number was
mentioned as Patta No.3. It is under such circumstances, the
petitioner filed an application under Section 152 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 before the learned Trial Court for the
purpose of correction of the decree by incorporating the correct
Patta Number. The said application which was registered and
numbered as Misc.(J) Case No.70/2023 in the Court of the
learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Darrang, Mangaldai.
Page No.# 4/5
The said application was rejected vide the impugned order dated
18.12.2024. It is under such circumstances, the petitioner has
approached this Court by filing the instant petition.
5. Mr. C. Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submitted that in view of the law laid down by the
Supreme Court in the case of Pratibha Singh & Another vs.
Shanti Devi Prasad & Another, reported in AIR 2003 SC 643, the
learned Trial Court ought not to have rejected the application.
The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that it
was the fault on the part of the Court in incorrectly mentioning
the Patta Number in the decree although in the plaint, the
correct Patta Number was mentioned. The learned counsel for
the petitioner further submitted that in the case of Pratibha
Singh & Another (supra), the Supreme Court had categorically
mentioned that if there was any mistake in the description of the
land, the same should be corrected under the provisions of
Section 152 or Section 147 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
by the Trial Court or Executing Court as the case may be. He,
therefore, submitted that the impugned order dated 18.12.2024
requires to be interfered with.
6. In addition to that, Mr. C. Goswami, the learned counsel for
the petitioner further submitted that an application has been filed
in Title Execution Case No.8/1994 by the judgment debtor for
Page No.# 5/5
the purpose of dismissal of the said Execution Proceedings in
view of the incorrect mentioning of the Patta Number in the
decree. He, therefore, submitted that the further proceedings of
Title Execution Case No.8/1994 is required to be stayed.
7. Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court
that the petitioner has been able to make out a prima-facie case
that the learned Trial Court had erred in exercising its
jurisdiction.
8. Consequently, this Court stays the further proceedings of
Title Execution Case No.8/1994 till the next date.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
