Disposed¶30

Gitima Roy and 2 Ors. v. Sabita Nath Sarma

Gauhati HC2 Jun 2025I.A.(Civil)/2877/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; I.A.(Civil)/2877/2024; Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC; Section 151 CPC; temporary injunction; status quo as to title; preservation of suit property pending Regular Second Appeal admitted on three substantial questions of law; specific performance suit dismissed; respondent in possession and enjoyment of suit property; Devashis Baruah, J.; decided 03.06.2025.

What did the court decide?

Parties directed to maintain status quo insofar as title to the suit property is concerned, without interfering with the respondent's present possession and enjoyment of the property; application disposed of accordingly. ¶30

Gitima Roy and 2 Ors. Vs Sabita Nath Sarma — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010187042024

2025:GAU-AS:7216

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2877/2024

¶6

GITIMA ROY AND 2 ORS

¶7

W/O PALLAB MEDHI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LUTUMA LOKHARA ROAD ,PO BINOVA NAGAR, PS FATASIL, GUWAHATI 781018, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶8

2: MOUSUMI MITRA W/O BISWAJIT MITRA

¶9

RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LALGANESH TINIALI SANTI NAGAR HOUSE NO. 2 PO LALGANESH PS FATASIL AMBARI DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶10

3: SUNITA SAHA

¶11

W/O NAGENDRA CHANDRA SAHA

¶12

RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 42

¶13

4TH BYE LANE BHASKAR NAGAR KALAPAHAR PS FATASIL AMBARI GUWAHATI 781018 DIST KAMRUP M ASSA

¶14

VERSUS

¶15

SABITA NATH SARMA

¶16

W/O LATE MONI KANTA NATH SARMA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 506, 5TH FLOOR, B BLOCK MANAR ELEGANCE SOME SUNDAR PALLAYA HSR 2ND SECTOR, BANGALORE, 560102

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

For the Applicant(s) : Mr. S. Ali, Advocate

¶19

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Ghosh, Advocate

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 03.06.2025

¶23

Heard Mr. S. Ali, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants. Mr. S.K. Ghosh, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent.

¶24

The instant application has been filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for grant of a temporary injunction thereby restraining the respondent, her men, agents, representatives, attorneys etc. from selling or encumbering the schedule property and from creating any third party rights thereon till the disposal of the Regular Second Appeal.

¶25

Mr. S.K. Ghosh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has filed the objection to the said application and submitted that the respondent do not have any intention to alienate the suit property. He further submitted that taking into account that the suit was filed seeking specific performance have been dismissed, the respondent should not be restrained

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

from enjoying the suit property.

¶28

Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the opinion that as the Regular Second Appeal has already been admitted by formulating 3 (three) substantial questions of law, the property in dispute is required to be preserved.

¶29

Considering the above, this Court directs the parties to maintain status quo insofar as title is concerned. This Court further makes it clear that the maintenance of status quo as regards title shall not however interfere in the enjoyment of the suit property which is presently in possession of the respondent.

¶30

With the above, the instant application stands disposed of.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Gitima Roy and 2 Ors. v. Sabita Nath Sarma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gitima Roy and 2 Ors. v. Sabita Nath Sarma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Seema Ghosh Vs Ishit Ghosh

Narjida Khatun Sultana Vs Anowar Uddin Ahmed

Paplu Gope Vs Md. Inam Waris and 4 Ors.

Sonaban Khatun and 9 Ors. Vs Daliman Bibi and 11 Ors.

Sonaban Khatun and 9 Ors. Vs Daliman Bibi and 11 Ors.

Kamal Prasad Chakraborty, Vs Dakhin Haiborgaon Natya Samity and 2 Ors.