Allowed

Smti. Anjana Biswas and 3 Ors. v. Sri Keshab Chandra Dey

Gauhati HC4 Jun 2018I.A.(Civil)/1795/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an application filed under Order XXII Rule 3(1) CPC for substitution of parties and setting aside abatement. The court held that since the application was filed within the limitation period under Article 121 of the Limitation Act, 1963, both applications stand allowed.

What did the court decide?

Abatement set aside and application for substitution allowed; both applications allowed.

Smti. Anjana Biswas and 3 Ors. Vs Sri Keshab Chandra Dey — Specific Performance | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010102662018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 1795/2018

¶5

1:SMTI. ANJANA BISWAS AND 3 ORS W/O- KRISHNA BISWAS

¶6

2: SHRI NIRMOY BISWAS S/O- KRISHNA BISWAS

¶7

3: SHRI SUMIT BISWAS S/O- KRISHNA BISWAS REP. BY HIS MOTHER SMTI. ANJANA BISWAS

¶8

4: ON THE DEATH OF GANESH BISWAS @ RAM KRISHNA BISWAS HIS LEGAL HEIR SHRI SUBHAM BISWAS ALL ARE R/O- ANANDA PALLY LUMDING TOWN P.O./P.S.- LUMDING- 782447 DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

1:SRI KESHAB CHANDRA DEY

¶11

S/O- LT. RAJENDRA NARAYAN DEY, VILL.- JARANGDISHA, P.O./ P.S. - LUMDING, DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM.

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D C CHAKRAVARTY

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S P CHOUDHURY

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil) 1796/2018

¶16

1:SMTI ANJANA BISWAS AND 3 ORS W/O- KRISHNA BISWAS

¶17

2: SHRI NIRMOY BISWAS S/O- KRISHNA BISWAS

¶18

3: SHRI SUMIT BISWAS S/O- KRISHNA BISWAS REP. BY HIS MOTHER SMTI. ANJANA BISWAS

¶19

4: ON THE DEATH OF GANESH BISWAS @ RAM KRISHNA BISWAS HIS LEGAL HEIR SHRI SUBHAM BISWAS ALL ARE R/O- ANANDA PALLY LUMDING TOWN P.O./P.S.- LUMDING- 782447 DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM. VERSUS

¶20

1:SRI KESHAB CHANDRA DEY S/O- LT. RAJENDRA NARAYAN DEY VILL.- JARANGDISHA P.O./ P.S. - LUMDING DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM.

¶21

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D C CHAKRAVARTY Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S P CHOUDHURY

¶22

BEFORE

¶23

HON BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Date : 04-06-2018

¶26

Heard Mr. D. C. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. A. S. Dhillon, learned counsel for the sole opposite party.

¶27

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant No.1 had died on 20.02.2018 left behind his wife and 2 sons. His second son is a minor and is represented by

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

his mother, the wife of the deceased.

¶30

This is an application is filed under Order XXII Rule 3 (1) CPC for substitution and IA (C) 1795/18 is filed under Order XXII Rule 3 (1) CPC for setting aside abatement.

¶31

Although the learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed this application, but having seen that the application has been filed within time prescribed in the Article 121 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963, this Court is inclined to allow both this application.

¶32

Accordingly, the abatement is set aside and the application for substitution is allowed.

¶33

Both the applications stands allowed.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Smti. Anjana Biswas and 3 Ors. v. Sri Keshab Chandra Dey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti. Anjana Biswas and 3 Ors. v. Sri Keshab Chandra Dey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S G.P Sales Coporation Vs the Union of India

Munindra Medhi Vs Md. Hasen Ali

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Moriyam Begum Laskar @ Moriam @ Morioum Begum and 2 Ors.

Dipak Kumar Das Vs Parkedavis India Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Naren Kalita Vs Rimi Kalita

Smti. Anita Goswami Vs Gajendra Vijoy Das @ Gajen Das and 2 Ors.