Disposed¶28

Mithun Chanda v. Smti Sampa Chanda and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC19 Jun 2025CRP(IO)/225/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court 2025; CRP(IO)/225/2025; Article 227 Constitution of India; Section 152 CPC rectification of clerical error; Guardians and Wards Act 1890 Sections 7 and 10; Misc. (Guardianship) Case No. 13/2019; District Judge Hojai; guardianship of minors Deb Chanda and Raj Chanda; erroneous marital status observation; incorrect date of birth; ex-gratia; family pension; Mohit Suresh Harchandrai v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited SLP(C) 5754-5755 of 2025; liberty to file fresh petition; disposed at motion stage.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the learned trial Court, Hojai on the next date fixed by filing an appropriate petition with supporting documents along with the birth certificate of Sri Deb Chanda; upon such filing, the trial Court shall consider the same in accordance with law.

Mithun Chanda Vs Smti Sampa Chanda and 2 Ors. — Child Custody and Guardianship | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 20.07.2023 of the learned District Judge, Hojai dismissing the petitioner's Section 152 CPC rectification petition (seeking correction of the order dated 28.11.2019 in Misc. (Guardianship) Case No. 13/2019) should be set aside. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the revision petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the learned trial Court on the next date fixed with an appropriate petition supported by documents including the birth certificate of Sri Deb Chanda; in the event such a petition is filed, the learned trial Court shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶25

Key takeaways

Courts, being the Courts of law and justice, are duty bound to ensure that on their account no party is made to suffer.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh), CRP(IO)/225/2025, Robin Phukan, J., order dated 20.06.2025. Revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 20.07.2023 of the learned District Judge, Hojai dismissing the petition filed under Section 152 CPC seeking rectification of the order dated 28.11.2019 in Misc. (Guardianship) Case No. 13/2019, whereby guardianship of the minors Sri Deb Chanda and Sri Raj Chanda had been granted to the petitioner under Sections 7 and 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The order dated 28.11.2019 had erroneously recorded that the opposite parties were married and had misstated the date of birth of Sri Deb Chanda, depriving them of ex-gratia and family pension entitlements. Invoking the principle that courts are duty bound to ensure that no party suffers on their account (citing Mohit Suresh Harchandrai v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited, SLP(C) Nos. 5754-5755 of 2025), the High Court disposed of the revision petition at the motion stage, granting liberty to file a fresh petition before the trial Court with supporting documents including the birth certificate, to be considered in accordance with law.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010131132025

2025:GAU-AS:8291

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

¶5

Case No. : CRP(IO)/225/2025

¶6

MITHUN CHANDA

¶7

S/O LATE KANAI LAL CHANDA, R/O DAKHIN BIDYANAGAR, P.O.- SINGARI BASTI, P.S. AND DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SMTI SAMPA CHANDA AND 2 ORS

¶10

D/O LATE KANAI LAL CHANDA, R/O DAKHIN BIDYANAGAR, P.O.SINGARI BASTI, P.S. AND DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM

¶11

2:SMTI. SOMA RANI CHANDA D/O LATE KANAI LAL CHANDA R/O DAKHIN BIDYANAGAR P.O.- SINGARI BASTI P.S. AND DIST- HOJAI ASSAM

¶12

3:SMTI. SANTOSHI CHANDA D/O LATE KANAI LAL CHANDA R/O DAKHIN BIDYANAGAR P.O.- SINGARI BASTI P.S. AND DIST- HOJAI ASSA

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B CHANDA, MR. DITUL DAS

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 20.06.2025

¶19

Heard Mr. B. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶20

In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.07.2023, passed by the learned District Judge, Hojai, in petition No. 459/2013, filed under Section 152 CPC, seeking rectification of the order dated 28.11.2019, passed in Misc. (Guardianship) Case No. 13/2019.

¶21

Mr. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being the elder brother of Sri Deb Chanda and Sri Raj Chanda, who are minors, filed an application under Section 7, read with Section 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, before the learned District Judge, Hojai (‘trial Court’ for short) for appointing the petitioner as the guardian of the minors, and thereafter, vide order dated 28.11.2019, the learned trial Court had allowed the petition and while allowing the petition, the learned trial Court had made an observation that the opposite parties were married, but in fact, the said opposite parties were not married at the relevant point of time, and also the learned trial Court had mentioned the date of birth of Sri Deb Chanda incorrectly. Mr. Chanda also submits that thereafter, having noticed the discrepancy in the order dated 28.11.2019, the petitioner had filed a petition, being petition No. 459/2023 on 20.07.2023, but the learned trial Court, vide impugned order dated 20.07.2023, had dismissed the petition on the ground that “the case is one of the

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

Guardianship and this Court had allowed the Guardianship in favour of the petitioner, this Court does not see any reason to alter the order dated 28.11.2019 and as such, the petition stands dismissed.” Mr. Chanda further submits that the said observation of the learned trial Court in respect of opposite parties has deprived them of getting ex-gratia amount on account of death of their father and also in getting family pension, and as such, there is a requirement for making necessary correction in the order dated 28.11.2019, and also in the impugned order dated 20.07.2023.

¶24

Having heard the submission of Mr. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also perused the impugned order dated 20.07.2023, and the order dated 28.11.2019.

¶25

Taking note of the submission of Mr. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner, and also considering the facts and circumstances on the record, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned trial Court by filing appropriate petition on the next date fixed, with supporting documents along with the birth certificate of Sri Deb Chanda, and in the event of such a petition being filed, the learned trial Court shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶26

It is to be mentioned here that the Courts, being the Courts of law and justice, are duty bound to ensure that on their account no party is made to suffer. [See - Mohit Suresh Harchandrai and Ors. Vs. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited, dated 06.05.2025, arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 5754-5755 of 2025 ]

¶27

Page No.# 4/4

¶28

In terms of above, this revision petition stands disposed of at this motion

¶29

stage itself.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Mithun Chanda v. Smti Sampa Chanda and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun Chanda v. Smti Sampa Chanda and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Balbir Cloth Stores and Ors. Vs Taramati Sharma and Anr.

M/S Balbir Colth Stroes and Ors. Vs Taramati Sharma and Anr.

M/S Balbir Colth Stroes and Ors. Vs Taramati Sharma and Anr.

Rejina Begum Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

M/S United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Danswrang Basumatary and Anr.

Raju Kalita Vs Chandra Dev Goswami