Allowed

Smti Mamani Mahanta and 4 Ors. v. Sri Chandan Das and Anr.

Gauhati HC1 Oct 2018I.A.(Civil)/2226/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed withdrawal of an appeal against refusal of ad-interim injunction in a civil suit involving disputed land. The court observed that subsequent sale of land and proposed amendment making the appeal infructuous permitted withdrawal with liberty to approach the trial court again.

What did the court decide?

Appeal along with I.A(Civil)/2226/2017 allowed (withdrawn) with liberty to approach trial court again as prayed.

Smti Mamani Mahanta and 4 Ors. Vs Sri Chandan… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010029302017

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 2226/2017

¶5

1:SMTI MAMANI MAHANTA and 4 ORS W/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA

¶6

2: SMTI SWARNALATA MAHATA

¶7

D/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA

¶8

3: SMTI KALYANEE MAHANTA

¶9

D/O LATE RAMESH CHA. MAHANTA

¶10

4: SMTI SANCHITA MAHANTA D/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA

¶11

5: SHIVA CHARAN MAHANTA

¶12

S/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA REPRESENTED BY THE APPELLANT NO. 1 ALL ARE R/O VILL. KONAPARA AZARA P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI-78101

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

1:SRI CHANDAN DAS and ANR

¶15

S/O LATE JADAV DAS, UDAYAN NAGAR, AZARA, P.S. AZARA, DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM, GUWAHATI 781017

¶16

2:AROBINDA MEDHI S/O LATE JATIN MEDHI VILL. KONAPARA AZARA

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI-78101

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.T R SARMA

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶21

Linked Case : FAO 42/2017

¶22

1:SMTI MAMANI MAHANTA and 4 ORS W/O LATE RAMESH CHANDRA MAHANTA

¶23

2: SMTI SWARNALATA MAHATA

¶24

D/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA

¶25

3: SMTI KALYANEE MAHANTA D/O LATE RAMESH CHA. MAHANTA

¶26

4: SMTI SANCHITA MAHANTA D/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA

¶27

5: SHIVA CHARAN MAHANTA

¶28

S/O LATE RAMESH CH. MAHANTA REPRESENTED BY THE APPELLANT NO. 1 ALL ARE R/O VILL. KONAPARA AZARA P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI-781017 VERSUS

¶29

1:SRI CHANDAN DAS and ANR S/O LATE JADAV DAS UDAYAN NAGAR AZARA P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781017

¶30

2:AROBINDA MEDHI

¶31

Page No.# 3/4

¶32

S/O LATE JATIN MEDHI VILL. KONAPARA AZARA P.S. AZARA DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI-781017

¶33

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.T R SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A DHAR (R1-2)

¶34

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶35

ORDER

¶36

Date : 01-10-2018

¶37

Heard Mr. T. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. A. Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶38

In course of arguments in this appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that prior to institution of the injunction petition, the respondents herein have sold the suit land by virtue of sale deed No. 586 dated 21.01.2017, which was not within their knowledge. After the said sale was disclosed by the respondents, during the pendency of the injunction application, the appellants have now made a prayer before the trial Court for impleading of the subsequent purchaser of the suit land and for amendment of the plaint.

¶39

It is further submitted that by the impugned order, the ad-interim injunction was refused by the learned trial Court on the basis of the said sale deed as the learned trial Court was of the opinion that if ad-interim injunction is granted, the subsequent purchaser would suffer more hardship than the appellants herein.

¶40

Hence, the learned counsel for the appellants submit that as he has made the prayer for amendment of the plaint to implead the subsequent purchaser and to challenge the sale the scope of the present appeal has become infructuous and, therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw this appeal and to approach the learned trial Court again for seeking ad-interim injunction, if so advised.

¶41

Page No.# 4/4

¶42

As per the learned counsel for the respondents, the matter has become infructuous.

¶43

In view of the subsequent development, he opposes the prayer to grant the liberty to approach learned trial Court again on the same subject matter.

¶44

This Court is on the prima facie view that if the sale of the suit land can be challenged and if the petitioner can make out a case on the basis of subsequent events, there will not any bar for the appellant to approach the learned trial Court again with the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 for the subsequent cause of action.

¶45

As the scope of the present appeal has become infructuous, this Court is inclined to allow the appellant withdraw this appeal with liberty as prayed for.

¶46

Accordingly, this appeal along with the I.A(Civil)/2226/2017 stands closed with liberty as prayed for.

¶47

Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Comparing Assistant

Smti Mamani Mahanta and 4 Ors. v. Sri Chandan Das and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti Mamani Mahanta and 4 Ors. v. Sri Chandan Das and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanai Karmakar Vs Subal Karmakar

Kanai Karmakar Vs Subal Karmakar

M/S Moumita Store and Anr. Vs the State Bank of India

Sri Mukut Phukan Vs the United Bank of India and 2 Ors.

Basistha Kalita Vs Shailendra Kumar Sarma

T and T Bricks Pvt. Ltd. Vs United Bank of India