Mustakin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mustakin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of; parties relegated to the competent civil court to ascertain their right, title, interest and possession, with such approach to be made within three months; status quo over the plot of land to be maintained till such approach and decision on any injunction application; parties to bear their own costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the disputed land was inherited by the private respondent from his mother, or whether the mother during her lifetime had made an oral gift of it in favour of the petitioner's father, i.e., a dispute as to the title of the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

The dispute in essence relates to the title of the parties (inheritance by the respondent versus oral gift to the petitioner's father), and such determination cannot be made either by the revenue authorities or by this court, as it requires assertion of facts through evidence.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of relegating the parties to the competent civil court to ascertain their right, title and interest and possession, such approach to be made within a period of three months.

Key takeaways

Till such approach is made by either of the parties and any injunction application filed and decided, status quo in respect of the plot of land in question is to be maintained.ratio¶¶30
The competent civil court should decide the claims of the parties based on their pleadings and evidence without being influenced by any observation made by this court in the present order and/or the determination made by the revenue authorities including the Assam Board of Revenue.ratio¶¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Arun Dev Choudhury, J.), WP(C)/1204/2023, decided 10.11.2025: Writ petition by Mustakin Ahmed assailing the order dated 02.02.2021 of the Settlement Officer, Goalpara in Misc. Case 01/2018-19, whereby the name of the private respondent's mother was restored in the revenue record by deleting the petitioner's name, as upheld by the Assam Board of Revenue in Appeal No. 16 RA (G)/2021 by order dated 08.12.2022. Held that the dispute was in essence one of title — whether the respondent inherited the land from his mother or whether she had made an oral gift in favour of the petitioner's father — a determination that cannot be made by the revenue authorities or by the writ court and requires assertion of facts through evidence. Writ petition disposed of, relegating the parties to the competent civil court to ascertain their right, title, interest and possession, such approach to be made within three months; status quo over the plot of land directed to be maintained till such approach and decision on any injunction application; the civil court to decide on pleadings and evidence uninfluenced by this Court's observations or the determinations of the revenue authorities including the Assam Board of Revenue; the impugned order to remain subject to the outcome of the civil court's determination. Parties to bear their own costs.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010040592023

2025:GAU-AS:15207

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

Case No. : WP(C)/1204/2023

MUSTAKIN AHMED

S/O- LT. SIRAJUDDIN AHMED, R/O- VILL- HASILIPARA, P.O., P.S. AND DIST.GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN-

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, ASSAM DISPUR, GHY-6

2:THE SECRETARY THE ASSAM BOARD OF REVENUE

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM

4:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER GOALPARA ASSAM

5:MOHAMMED ALI MANDAL S/O- MOHAR ALI MANDAL R/O- VILL- RAKHARKILLA P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST.- GOALPARA ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F Z MAZUMDER, MS. A LALA

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, FOR CAVEATOR,MR. A MANNAF,SC, REVENUE

Page No.# 2/4

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R

10.11.2025

Heard Mr. FZ Mazumder, learned counsel for petitioner. Also heard Mr. A Mannan, learned counsel for the private respondent.

By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 02.02.2021 passed by the Settlement Officer in Misc. Case 01/2018-19, whereby the name of the mother of the private respondent was restored in the revenue record by deleting the name of the petitioner. Such order was assailed before the Assam Board of Revenue in Appeal No. 16 RA (G)/2021. The learned Board of Revenue upheld such decision and dismissed the appeal by its order dated 08.12.2022. Assailing the same, the present application is filed.

From the material available on record what is seen is that the private respondent herein claims that his mother was the recorded pattadar in respect of the disputed land, however, her name was deleted at the behest of the present petitioner and the name of the present petitioner was incorporated in the revenue record and accordingly, at the first instance, Misc Case No. 12/2018 was preferred, which was registered at the office of the Assistant Settlement Officer, Balijana Revenue Circle and during its pending, the Settlement Officer of the Goalpara district registered another Misc. Case No. 01/2018-19. The claim of the respondent is that he inherited the plot of land from his mother.

On the other hand, it is the claim of the writ petitioner that his predecessor-in-interest acquired ownership of the land in question by virtue of an oral gift executed by the mother of the respondent.

In the considered opinion of this court, in essence, the dispute relates

Page No.# 3/4

to the title of the parties based on their respective claim i.e. as to whether the respondent has inherited the land in question from his mother or whether the mother of the respondent during her lifetime had made an oral gift in favour of the father of the petitioner. Such determination cannot be made either by the revenue authorities or by this court, which requires assertion of facts through evidence.

Both the learned counsel for the parties submit that in view of the aforesaid, the parties may be relegated to the competent civil court to ascertain their right, title and interest based on which the revenue record can be corrected. As recorded hereinabove, this court is also of the opinion that such factual determination should be made by competent civil court having jurisdiction.

At this stage, both the learned counsel for the parties claim that both of them have been possessing the plot of land in question. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is having his dwelling house over the plot of land and on the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent submits it is agricultural land for cultivation.

Be that as it may, taking note of the aforesaid, this writ petition stands disposed of relegating the parties to the competent civil court to ascertain their right, title and interest and possession. Such approach may be made within a period of three months from today.

Till such approach is made by either of the parties and any injunction application filed and decided, it is provided that status quo in respect of the plot of land in question be maintained.

While parting with the record, it is made clear that the competent civil court should decide the claims of the parties based on their pleadings and

Page No.# 4/4

evidence without being influenced by any of the observation made by this court in the present order and / or the determination made by the revenue authorities including the Assam Board of Revenue, which is under challenge before this court.

It is needless to say that the order impugned in the present proceeding and as recorded hereinabove shall always be subject to outcome of the determination that may be made by the competent civil court.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. Parties to bear their own cost.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant