Allowed

On the Death of Harunor Roshid, His Legal Heir, Jyotsna Roshid and Anr. v. M/S. Kaizen Constructions and Anr.

Gauhati HC22 Nov 2019I.A.(Civil)/3764/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an application to restore a revision petition dismissed for default. The court noted the original petitioner died shortly before the dismissal, leading to late discovery of the dismissal and a timely substitution application. The respondent had no objection to restoration.

What did the court decide?

Recalled the order dated 29.09.2015 and restored the revision petition back to file.

On the Death of Harunor Roshid, His Legal… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010281962019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 3764/2019

¶5

1:ON THE DEATH OF HARUNOR ROSHID, HIS LEGAL HEIR, JYOTSNA ROSHID AND ANR

¶6

W/O LATE HARUNOR ROSHID, R/O HOUSE NO. 8 BYE LANE NO. 1, AJANATA PATH, BELTOLA, SURVEY, GUWAHATI 781028, IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶7

2: ZEHIRUL ISLAM ROSHID S/O LATE HARUNOR ROSHID R/O HOUSE NO. 8 BYE LANE NO. 1 AJANATA PATH BELTOLA SURVEY GUWAHATI 781028 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:M/S. KAIZEN CONSTRUCTIONS and ANR.

¶10

NO. 3, MODHGHORIA, AMYAPUR PATH, GUWAHATI, IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶11

2:NOZOOM REHMAN HAZARIKA S/O LATE NURUL REHMAN PROPRIETOR M/S KAIZEN CONSTRUCTION R/O GOVERNMENT PRESS ROAD BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI 781021 IN THE DIST. OF KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A I Ali

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S ALI

¶14

Page No.# 2/2

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

22.11.2019.

¶19

Heard Mr. D. Baruah, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Iqbal, the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶20

This is an application for setting aside the dismissal order dated 29.09.2015 for non prosecution of the connected revision petition. Both the learned counsel admits that they were not aware about the dismissal of this revision petition nor listing of this revision petition on that particular date i.e. 29.09.2015. The sole petitioner namely Harunor Roshid died on 04.06.2019 and thereafter, necessary application was filed for substitution of the said deceased petitioner by his legal heirs. The said application was filed on 02.08.2019. As the said substitution application along with the connected revision petition was not listed, the learned counsel for the petitioner made an enquiry and was shocked to learn that the said revision petition was dismissed for default.

¶21

Having come to the knowledge of both the counsel about the said dismissal, the petitioner filed this petition for its restoration. Keeping in view the date of knowledge of its dismissal and the fair submission of Mr. Iqbal that he has no objection in restoring back the petition to file, I hereby allow this petition recalling the order dated 29.09.2015 and restore the revision petition back to file.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

On the Death of Harunor Roshid, His Legal Heir, Jyotsna Roshid and Anr. v. M/S. Kaizen Constructions and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

On the Death of Harunor Roshid, His Legal Heir, Jyotsna Roshid and Anr. v. M/S. Kaizen Constructions 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

Green Valley Club Vs Moilapathar Bazar, Represented by Nurul Islam and Anr.

Sri Bimal Sarma Vs Smti Daibaki Kumari Devi and 5 Ors.

On the Death of Krishna Biswas, His Legal Heirs and Anr. Vs Keshab Chandra Dey

M/S Durian Industries Ltd. Vs Col. Padmalochan Barman and Anr.

Balsrang Arengh and 2 Ors. Vs Dinesh Kumar Mittal and 3 Ors.

Rakesh Shukla and Anr. Vs Sanjeev Kumar Shukla and 2 Ors.