The High Court rejected the applicant's prayer to modify an interim order preventing property sale pending an appeal. However, the Court granted an out-of-turn hearing for the appeal due to expressed urgency and economic consequences.
Prayer to modify interim order rejected. Out-of-turn hearing of the appeal granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010030132019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 583/2019
1:DAVRAJ DUTTA S/O- LATE DAMNARA DUTTA
PROPRIETOR OF AAKANSHA CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGNING, SURAJ NAGAR, THAKURIA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE ASIRVAD VIVAH BHAWAN, P.O.GUWAHATI- 781022
VERSUS
1:SMTI. ALAKA GOSWAMI @ ARUNA @ ALAKA BORDOLOI W/O- SRI MAHESH GOSWAMI
R/O- C/O- SRI NARAYAN KUMAR, HOUSE NO. 95, TANGLA SATRA, SIX MILE, OPP. ROAD NRL PETROL PUMP, JAYANAGAR, GUWAHATI- 781022, DIST.- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O P BHATI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S J SARMAH
Linked Case : RFA 58/2016
1:SMT ALAKA GOSWAMI @ ARUNA @ ALAKA BORDOLOI W/O SRI MAHESH GOSWAMI R/O C/O SRI NARAYAN KUMAR HOUSE NO. 95 TANGLA SATRA SIX MILE OPP. ROAD NRL PETROL PUMP JAYANAGAR GUWAHATI 781022 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/3
VERSUS
1:SRI DAVRAJ DUTTA S/O LATE DAMBARU DUTTA PROPRIETOR OF AAKANKASHA CONSTRUCTION and DESIGNING SURAJ NAGAR THAKURIA COMPLEX OPPOSITE ASIRVAD VIVAH BHAWAN P.O. GUWAHATI 781022 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S N ADHYAPAK Advocate for the Respondent : MR.S KHAN
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
Date : 01-06-2020
Heard Mr. O.P. Bhati, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S.J. Sarmah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/opposite party.
By filing this IA, the applicant has prayed for modification of the order dated 29/09/2016
passed in IA(C) No. 1488/2016, arising out of RFA 58/2016, which was made absolute till disposal of the appeal by the subsequent order dated 04/05/2018.
According to Mr. Bhati, the applicant is entitled to receive at-lease 50% of the decreetal amount in view of the judgement and decree passed by the learned trial Court. The aforesaid submission of Mr. Bhati has, however, been strongly opposed by Mr. Sarmah, learned counsel for the opposite party.
I find from the record that by the order dated 04/05/2018, the earlier interim order dated 29/09/2016 was made absolute after hearing the learned counsel for both parties. Moreover, the
Page No.# 3/3
appeal preferred against the money decree has already been admitted and the same is pending before this Court since 2016. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the prayer for modification of the order cannot be accepted by this Court at this stage. Therefore, the said prayer stands rejected. However, appreciating the urgency expressed by Mr. Bhati on behalf of his client and considering the economic consequence of the decree passed by the learned trial Court, I am inclined to grant out-of-turn hearing of the appeal.
Registry is, therefore, directed to list the connected appeal for final hearing on 15/07/2020 along with the LCR.
IA stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE
Sukhamay
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim order preventing the sale of the appellant's property pending appeal can be modified at this stage.
DAVRAJ DUTTA
SMTI. ALAKA GOSWAMI
SUMAN SHYAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
