Allowed

On the Death of Nagendra Ch. Ray, His Legal Heirs Madhumala Ray Choudhury and 5 Ors. v. Sri Lachit Chandra Ray

Gauhati HC17 Mar 2022I.A.(Civil)/3452/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court condoned a delay of 595 days in filing a connected appeal regarding a suit for declaration of property rights. The court accepted medical illness as valid explanation and held that applicants needed an opportunity to be heard before losing claimed property. The application for condonation was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 595 days condoned; connected appeal registered and listed.

On the Death of Nagendra Ch. Ray, His Legal Heirs… — Property and Title | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010219172019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3452/2019

¶5

ON THE DEATH OF NAGENDRA CH. RAY, HIS LEGAL HEIRS MADHUMALA RAY CHOUDHURY AND 5 ORS

¶6

W/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH. RAY, R/O- VILL.- BHATIPARA PART-I, P.O., P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON.

¶7

2: NAVADEVI RAY CHOUDHURY @ NAVADEEP RAY S/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH. RAY R/O- VILL.- BHATIPARA PART-I P.O.

¶8

P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON.

¶9

3: PRATIVA DEVI

¶10

W/O- SRI AJIT KR. MEDHI D/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH RAY R/O- BAKHRAPARA (BORPARA) P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON.

¶11

4: CHANDRA MOHAN RAY S/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH. RAY R/O- BAKHRAPARA (BORPARA) P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON.

¶12

5: NAYAN RAY CHOUDHURY S/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH. RAY R/O- VILL.- BHATIPARA PART-I P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON PIN- 783380.

¶13

6: RANJUMONI RAY CHOUDHURY

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

W/O- SRI DHRUBAJYOTI BORAH D/O- LATE NAGENDRA CH. RAY R/O- HAKUJAN GHAHIGAON P.O. GHAHIGAON P.S. GOHPUR DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784168

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

SRI LACHIT CHANDRA RAY S/O- LATE GIRIDHAR RAY, R/O- VILL.- BHATIPARA, PART-I, PURANI BONGAIGAON, P.S. AND DIST.- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 783380.

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R CHOUDHURY

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N SARKAR

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 17-03-2022

¶23

Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel representing the applicants as well as Mr. P. K. Basu, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶24

This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of 595 days of delay in preferring the connected appeal.

¶25

The ground taken by the applicants is that one of the applicants actually has been taking steps in the suit also that was disposed of by the trial court. That particular applicant fell ill and, therefore, he could not take steps in preferring the appeal in time. Some medical documents are also filed along with the application.

¶26

Mr. Basu, appearing for the opposite party, objected to the prayer made by the petitioners on the ground that only 9 (nine) days of delay has been explained and no explanation has been

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

given for the remaining period.

¶29

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the both sides.

¶30

The applicants filed the suit before the court below seeking a declaration of their right, title and interest as well as confirmation of possession over the suit land. The suit was dismissed. Therefore, it is clear that the applicants never had anything to gain by intentionally causing the delay in filing the appeal. Moreover, it is a settled position of law that while considering a prayer for condonation of delay, the courts are not supposed to take hypertechnical approach. In fact, day-to-day explanation is not required in a prayer for condonation of delay.

¶31

This court is of the opinion that since the applicants are on the verge of losing property which they claimed to be their, they need to be given an opportunity of being heard. Therefore, this court hereby holds that the delay has been satisfactorily explained and accordingly the delay stands condoned. The connected appeal shall be registered and listed accordingly.

¶32

The IA(C) stands disposed of.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

On the Death of Nagendra Ch. Ray, His Legal Heirs Madhumala Ray Choudhury and 5 Ors. v. Sri Lachit Chandra Ray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

On the Death of Nagendra Ch. Ray, His Legal Heirs Madhumala Ray Choudhury and 5 Ors. v. Sri Lachit Chandra Ray

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

Pradip Chakroborty Vs Ratan Chakroborty and 3 Ors.

Manirul Ali Vs Firdoja Begum and Anr.

Rina Bhattacharyya and 2 Ors. Vs Tileswar Bhuyan

Mangli Chetri and 2 Ors. Vs Julhash Ali and Anr.

Subhash Chandi Vs Jyoti Chandi and Anr.

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kanchani Rabha and 7 Ors.