Disposed¶22

Dr Manabendra Lahkar v. Smti Malati Nath and Anr.

Gauhati HC12 Jul 2026CRP(IO)/305/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Time-bound disposal direction; delay in pronouncement of judgment after completion of trial; Title Suit No.25/2017; Petition No.1585/2026; Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamrup, Amingaon; transfer of Presiding Officer; written argument already filed; further argument fixation questioned; Article 21; Article 15(2)(b) Constitution of India; petitioner-in-person; Gauhati High Court; CRP(IO); Robin Phukan, J.; order dated 20.06.2026; next date preponement.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Trial Court to prepone the next date after notifying both the parties and to dispose of Title Suit No.25/2017 within 4 (four) weeks; the petitioner to obtain a certified copy of the order and place it before the learned Trial Court within one week. ¶22

Dr Manabendra Lahkar Vs Smti Malati Nath and Anr. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the Trial Court should be directed to dispose of Title Suit No.25/2017 in a time bound manner owing to the prolonged delay, alleged to affect the petitioner's life, liberty and livelihood under Article 15(2)(b) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

Where the plaintiff has already filed written argument, the Trial Court can complete hearing the argument of the other side and thereafter proceed to pronounce the judgment; there was no justification to fix the matter again for further argument.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of by directing the learned Trial Court to prepone the next date after notifying both the parties and to dispose of Title Suit No.25/2017 within a period of four weeks from the date of the order.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan), CRP(IO)/305/2026, decided 13.07.2026: The petitioner-in-person, plaintiff in Title Suit No.25/2017 before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamrup, Amingaon, was aggrieved by the Trial Court's order dated 20.06.2026 fixing the matter on 29.08.2026 for further argument, after trial had concluded and his written argument had been filed on 25.05.2026 following the transfer of the Presiding Officer. Invoking Article 15(2)(b) and Article 21 of the Constitution, he sought time-bound disposal. The Court observed that once written argument is on record, the Trial Court can complete hearing the other side's argument and proceed to pronounce judgment, and disposed of the petition by directing preponement of the next date after notifying both parties and disposal of the suit within 4 (four) weeks; the petitioner was directed to place a certified copy of the order before the Trial Court within one week.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010141162026

2026:GAU-AS:9494

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

¶5

Case No. : CRP(IO)/305/2026

¶6

DR MANABENDRA LAHKAR AS ON 6TH MARCH 2026, SON OF LATE BHADRA RAM LAHKAR, RESIDENT OF RANGIA TOWN, WARD NO.03, P.O. RANGIA, P.S. RANGIA, MOUZA PANDURI, DISTRICT - KAMRUP, ASSAM, 781354

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SMTI MALATI NATH AND ANR WIFE OF SRI AMULYA CH. NATH, RESIDENT OF RANGIA TOWN, WARD NO. 03, P.O. RANGIA, P.S. RANGIA, MOUZA PANDURI, DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM, 781354

¶9

2:SRI AMULYA CH NATH SON OF LATE PRATAP NATH RESIDENT OF RANGIA TOWN WARD NO. 03 P.O. RANGIA P.S. RANGIA MOUZA PANDURI DISTRICT KAMRUP ASSAM 78135

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : PETITIONER IN PERSON,

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶14

ORDER

¶15

13.07.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. Manabendra Lahkar, the petitioner-in-person.

¶17

2. The petitioner herein is mainly aggrieved by the order dated 20.06.2026, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamrup, Amingaon, in Title Suit No.25/2017. It is to be noted here that vide order dated 20.06.2026, the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamrup, Amingaon (Trial Court, hereinafter) has fixed the matter on 29.08.2026, for further argument.

¶18

3. The petitioner-in-person submits that he has instituted one title suit, being Title Suit No.25/2017 before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kamrup, Amingaon and in the said title suit, the respondents herein as defendants entered appearance and contested the same by filing written statement and after trial, the learned Trial Court has fixed the matter on 30.04.2026, for judgment. But, on account of transfer of the Presiding Officer, the judgment could not be pronounced and thereafter, the matter was adjourned till 16.05.2026. On 16.05.2026, the petitioner-in-person, as plaintiff, has filed one Petition No.1585/2026, for pronouncement of judgment and the learned Trial Court has fixed the matter on 25.05.2026 for argument and on 25.05.2026, the petitioner-in-person has submitted his written argument and thereafter, the learned Trial Court has fixed the matter on 20.06.2026, for further argument and on 20.06.2026, the learned Trial Court heard the argument partly and fixed the matter on 29.08.2026, for further argument.

¶19

4. The petitioner-in-person also submits that on account of prolong delay in disposal of the suit, grave prejudice is caused to him, affecting his life, liberty and livelihood and thereby infringed the right guaranteed to him under Article 15(2)(b) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and under such circumstances, he has contended to issue direction to the learned Trial Court to dispose of the Title Suit No.25/2017 in a time bound manner.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

5. Having heard the submission of the petitioner-in-person, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the orders dated 16.05.2026, 25.05.2026 and 20.06.2026. And it appears that vide order dated 20.06.2026, the learned Trial Court has fixed the matter on 29.08.2026.

¶22

6. It appears that on 16.05.2026 the petitioner-in-person has filed the Petition No.1585/2026 for pronouncement of judgment and then the learned Trial Court has fixed the matter on 25.05.2026, on which the petitioner-in-person has already filed written argument. If the petitioner-in-person has already filed written argument, then this Court failed to comprehend as to why the matter has been fixed again on 29.08.2026 for further argument. It can easily complete hearing argument of the other side and thereafter proceed to pronounce the judgment. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the learned Trial Court to prepone the next date after notifying both the parties and to dispose of the Title Suit No.25/2017 within a period of 4(four) weeks from today.

¶23

7. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the learned Trial Court within a period of one week from today.

¶24

Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Dr Manabendra Lahkar v. Smti Malati Nath and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Manabendra Lahkar v. Smti Malati Nath and Anr.

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

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Aizawl Vs Sh Roliana and Anr.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Guwahati Vs Sh C.Lalzika and 4 Ors.

M/S New India Assurance Co. Vs Sh Roliana and Anr.

Hafijur Rahman Vs the Regional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt. Susila Bala Ray and 6 Ors. Vs Karuna Ray and 5 Ors.

Md. Sariful Islam and 3 Ors. Vs Md. Ataur Rahman and 7 Ors.