The Gauhati High Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the current review petition regarding the limitation issue in an accompanying title suit. The interim stay order on the title suit was vacated, and parties were directed to appear for trial.
Permitted withdrawal of petition; vacated interim stay order; directives for trial Court.
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
GAHC010061412020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/77/2020
DEBEN SARMAH AND ANR.
S/O- LT. CHANDRADHAR SHARMAH, R/O- NEPALIKHUTI GAON, RAJABARI, PO- RAJABARI, PS- BOKAKHAT, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785612.
2: SMTI. MALOBIKA SARMA W/O- SHRI DEBEN SARMAH R/O- NEPALIKHUTI GAON RAJABARI PO- RAJABARI PS- BOKAKHAT DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785612
VERSUS
HORENDRA NATH SARMAH S/O- LT. CHANDRADHAR SHARMAH, R/O- NEPALIKHUTI GAON, RAJABARI, PO- RAJABARI, PS- BOKAKHAT, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785612.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. N S THAKURIA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR M CHETIA
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
Date : 12-05-2022
Heard Ms. N Thakuria, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M Chetia, the learned counsel for the respondent.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that taking into consideration the question of limitation in respect to the instant case would be a question of law and facts, and therefore, she would not like to press the instant petition, but, however, she submits that the trial Court while adjudicating the question of limitation in the suit should not be influenced by the observations made in the impugned order dated 09.01.2020.
I have heard the learned counsel for the respondent also.
Taking into consideration the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court therefore permits the petitioner to withdraw the instant petition. It is, however made clear that the trial Court shall decide the issue of limitation in the suit without being influenced by the order dated 09.01.2020 passed in Title Suit No.5/2017.
This court vide an order dated 13.03.2020 had stayed the further proceedings of Title Suit No.5/2017 pending before the Court of the learned Munsiff Bokakhat and the said order was continued from time to time.
In view of the withdrawal of the instant proceedings and consequent disposal, the interim order dated 13.03.2020 stands
Page No.# 3/3
vacated and the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 27.05.2022 and the trial Court shall thereupon take up the suit for disposal in accordance with law.
The instant petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial Court should be influenced by the impugned order dated 09.01.2020 when deciding the question of limitation.
DEBEN SARMAH AND ANR.
HORENDRA NATH SARMAH
DEVASHIS BARUAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
