Samiran Karmakar vs Chandika Gogoi And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 540 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Samiran Karmakar vs Chandika Gogoi And Anr on 14 May, 2025

                                                                         Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010117652024




                                                                  undefined

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

                                    Case No. : RSA/57/2025

            SAMIRAN KARMAKAR
            S/O LATE SACHINDRA KARMAKAR, R/O VILL UTTAR BORBIL, P.S.
            HOWRAGHAT, MOUZA PHULONI, DISTR KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            CHANDIKA GOGOI AND ANR
            D/O LATE HARA KANTA GOGOI
            RESIDENT OF PHULONI GAON, PO LANGHIN TINIALI, PS DOKMOKA,
            MOUZA PHULONI, DIST KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM 782481

            2:SMTI DINESWARI GOGOI
             D/O LATE HARA KANTA GOGOI
            RESIDENT OF PHULONI GAON
             PO LANGHIN TINIALI
             PS DOKMOKA
             MOUZA PHULONI
             DIST KARBI ANGLONG
            ASSAM 78248

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY, MR A K AZAD,MR. S R
BARBHUIYA

Advocate for the Respondent : ,




             Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1410/2025

            SAMIRAN KARMAKAR
                                                                      Page No.# 2/4

            S/O LATE SACHINDRA KARMAKAR
            R/O VILL UTTAR BORBIL
            P.S. HOWRAGHAT
            MOUZA PHULONI
            DISTR KARBI ANGLONG
            ASSAM


            VERSUS

            CHANDIKA GOGOI AND ANR
            D/O LATE HARA KANTA GOGOI RESIDENT OF PHULONI GAON
            PO LANGHIN TINIALI
            PS DOKMOKA
            MOUZA PHULONI
            DIST KARBI ANGLONG
            ASSAM 782481

            2:SMTI DINESWARI GOGOI
            D/O LATE HARA KANTA GOGOI
            RESIDENT OF PHULONI GAON
             PO LANGHIN TINIALI
             PS DOKMOKA
             MOUZA PHULONI
             DIST KARBI ANGLONG
            ASSAM 782481
             ------------
            Advocate for : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY
            Advocate for : appearing for CHANDIKA GOGOI AND ANR



                                 BEFORE
              HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

                                       ORDER

14.05.2025

1. Heard learned counsel Mr. P. K. Roychoudhury for the appellant Sri Samiran Karmakar.

2. This application has been filed uner Order 41 Rule 5 of the CPC with prayer for stay of the operation of the impugned judgment dated 20.11.2023 and Page No.# 3/4

decree dated 30.11.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Karbi Anglong in Title Appeal No. 06/2022 and the judgment and order dated 06.07.2022 and decree dated 20.07.2022, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Karbi Anglong in Title Suit No. 01/2017 (new) corresponding to Title Suit No. 04/2013 (old).

3. It is submitted that against the aforementioned judgment and order, the respondents/plaintiff may prefer title execution case for execution of the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. As the plaintiffs have a good case and they are likely to succeed in this appeal, they will suffer irreparable loss if the respondent will be successful in recovery of possession of the disputed land on the strength of the order in the aforementioned title suit.

4. The plaintiff brought up the suit as the defendant/appellant kept occupying the suit land. It is submitted that vide judgment and order dated 06.07.2022, the suit was decreed with cost. The learned Trial Court has erroneously decreed the suit on the basis of certified copies of original documents. If the respondent/plaintiff was the lawful owner of the suit land, then why did the respondent/plaintiff fail to produce and exhibit the original documents of the annual khiraj patta of the suit land along with the periodic khiraj patta of the same suit land as well as the original order dated 16.03.2007, passed by the ARO/ASO. It is further submitted that when a title appeal was preferred by the appellants, the Appellate court had erroneously observed in the judgment and order dated 20.11.2023 in Title Appeal No. 6/2022, that the aforementioned documents were proved in original. This is a gross error apparent on the face of the record.

The appellant has been highly prejudiced as the evidence was not carefully scrutinized, which reflects contradictory comments on the documents produced Page No.# 4/4

in support of the title suit vis-a-vis the title appeal.

5. It is further submitted that this suit is also barred by limitation as the cause of action arose in the year 2005 and the confirmation for possession was filed in the year 2013.

6. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

7. It appears that there is a prima facie case for stay of the impugned order. Thereby, the operation of the impugned judgment and order dated 06.07.2022 passed in TS No. 01/2017 (new) corresponding to TS No. 04/2013 (old) and TA No. 06/2022 is stayed till the next date of listing.

8. Issue notice to the respondents returnable within 3 (three) weeks.

9. List accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant