Allowed

Kamakhya Saha v. Uttam Kr. Saha and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2022CRP(IO)/83/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition under Article 227, the Gauhati High Court set aside an order by the Civil Judge rejecting a belated List of Witnesses. The Court held that despite the petitioner's negligence, procedural compliance warranted acceptance of the list to dispense justice.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Civil Judge, Darrang, Mangaldai in Title Suit No. 08/2018, setting aside the List of Witnesses, was set aside. The List of Witnesses was directed to be accepte

Kamakhya Saha Vs Uttam Kr. Saha and 2 Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010129722021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : CRP(IO)/83/2021

¶5

KAMAKHYA SAHA S/O- LATE HARIDAS SAHA, R/O- WARD NO. 3, KHRUPATIYA TOWN, DIST.DARRANG.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

UTTAM KR. SAHA AND 2 ORS S/O- LATE JANENDRA MOHAN SAHA, R/O- WARD NO. 3, KHARUPETIA TOWN, P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPETIA, DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM 2:AMAR DEY S/O- LATE UPEN DEY C/O- MIHIR GHOSE VILL.- WARD NO. 7 KHARUPETIA TOWN P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPETIA DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM

¶8

3:ALOK KUMAR BANTHIA S/O- SRI DHANRAJ BANTHIA WARD NO. 1 KHARUPETIA TOWN P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPETIA DIST.- DARRANG ASSA

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P CHALIHA

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

03.03.2022

¶15

Heard Mr. D. P. Chaliha, learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. M. Roy, Advocate appearing for the petitioner.

¶16

None appears for the respondents though service of notice is complete.

¶17

This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby the order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Civil Judge, Darrang, Mangaldai in Title Suit No. 08/2018 is under challenge.

¶18

The petitioner is the defendant before the court below. He filed the List of Witnesses at a belated stage and, therefore, the court below refused to accept the same on the ground that the defendant/petitioner was negligent.

¶19

Each of the parties to the lis is entitled to examine any witness/witnesses to prove his case. Order 16 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure empowers the court to permit a party to a suit to call, whether by summoning through court or otherwise, even if the party desires to examine witnesses other than those named in the list.

¶20

The courts are required to interpret the law in a positive manner, not in a negative manner. After all, courts exist for dispensing justice to the people.In the case in hand, the trial has not yet started.

¶21

The petitioner was a bit negligent and, therefore, the petitioner could not file the List of Witnesses at the required stage. But he has complied the procedural law and that is why the court should have accepted the List of Witnesses. On a plain reading of the impugned order dated 10.08.2021, it is clear that the court below did not apply judicial mind while rejecting the prayer of the defendant/petitioner.

¶22

Therefore, the order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Civil Judge, Darrang, Mangaldai in Title Suit No. 08/2018 is set aside. The List of Witnesses filed by the petitioner shall be accepted by the court below and proceed to dispose of the case in

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

accordance with law.

¶26

With the above observation, the civil revision petition is disposed of.

¶27

Comparing Assistant

Kamakhya Saha v. Uttam Kr. Saha and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamakhya Saha v. Uttam Kr. Saha and 2 Ors.

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

MD Jahur Ali Vs M/S Prerona Transport and Carrying Co. P Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Punakan @ Phukon Boro Vs Afiya Khatoon and 2 Ors.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Kamana Bala Das and 4 Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mrs. Rokia Begum and 7 Ors.

Smt. Shanta Dey and Anr. Vs Sri Jugal Kishor Mahanto and 3 Ors.

Smti. Kalyani Kalita Vs Lava Kumar Das