Disposed

Smt Bhanita Kalita v. Sri Bikash Ranjan Das

Gauhati HC14 Jul 2026I.A.(Civil)/2084/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interlocutory application seeking correction of a clerical mistake in paragraph 9 of an order dated 06.04.2026 in Tr.P.(C) No. 93/2025, where the transferee court of a guardianship case was wrongly stated as District Judge instead of Principal Judge Family Court No. 1. The High Court directed the order be read accordingly and closed the IA.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt Bhanita Kalita Vs Sri Bikash Ranjan Das — Matrimonial and Divorce | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010116252026

2026:GAU-AS:9625

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2084/2026

¶6

SMT BHANITA KALITA

¶7

WIFE OF SHRI BIKASH RANJAN DS DAUGHTER OF LATE KHANINDRA DAS RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 18 LALMATI NEAR IIE BYE LANE GANESHPUR PO AND PS BASISTHA DISTRICT KAMRUP M ASSAM 781029

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SRI BIKASH RANJAN DAS

¶10

SON OF DR MANORANJAN DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KAHARPARA SARUPETA PO SARUPETA PS PATACHARKUCHI DISTRICT BAJALI ASSAM 781318

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. DITUL DAS, MR NABENDU PATHAK,MR. M P SARMA,MR. B J TALUKDAR

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : MR P P MEDHI, MR G BARGAYARY,MAYURI GOGOI,MS. U ROY

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶14

ORDER

¶15

15.07.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. D. Das, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. U. Roy, learned counsel for the opposite party.

¶17

2. This interlocutory application is preferred by the applicant for correction of the clerical mistake crept in the last line of the paragraph No. 9 of the order

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

dated 06.04.2026, passed in Tr.P.(C) No. 93/2025.

¶20

3. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the applicant, taking this court through the paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 06.04.2026, submits that while transferring the Misc. G.C. Case No. 04/2022 from the court of learned District Judge, Bajali, it has been mentioned that the same has to be transferred to the court of learned District Judge, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, but it ought to have been learned Principal Judge Family Court No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati.

¶21

4. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of Mr. Das, learned counsel for the applicant, it is provided that henceforth the court of learned District Judge, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, in the last portion of the paragraph No. 9 of the order dated 06.04.2026, passed in Tr.P.(C) No. 93/2025, shall be read as learned Principal Judge Family Court No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, for all purposes.

¶22

5. Let this order be part of the order dated 06.04.2026, passed in Tr.P.(C) No. 93/2025.

¶23

6. In terms of above, this IA stands closed.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Smt Bhanita Kalita v. Sri Bikash Ranjan Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt Bhanita Kalita v. Sri Bikash Ranjan Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranju Deka Vs the General Manager, the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Dr Manabendra Lahkar Vs Smti Malati Nath and Anr.

Smti. Padmawati Hazarika @ Padmavati Hazarika Vs Navajit Bora

Prabhu Kumar Poddar Vs Smt. Indu Jain

Putul Das and Ors. Vs Madhabi Mazumder

Project Director National Highways Authority of India NHAI Vs Sri Jai Prakash Prasad