- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 24 April 2024
- Bench
- Devashis Baruah
- Case no.
- SAO 4/2007
Judgment
ORDER
25.04.2024
¶1This is an appeal under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the order dated
02.03.2007, in Money Appeal No. 01/2006 by which the learned District Judge at Karimganj remanded the suit for a fresh trial to the learned trial court.
¶2This court have perused the impugned order dated 02.03.2007 and from a perusal of the said order, it does not show the reason why the learned First Appellate Court had remanded the matter back to the learned trial court, that to, when the learned First Appellate Court could have decided the said appeal on its merit being the court of facts and law.
¶3In the opinion of this court, the said order is contrary to the provisions of Order XLI Rule 24 of the Code and as such, the impugned order dated 02.03.2007 is set aside and quashed and the learned First Appellate Court, i.e. the learned District Judge, Karimganj is directed to decide the appeal on its merits, on the basis of the materials which are already available on record.
¶4This court has duly taken note that the parties herein are represented before this court. Accordingly, the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Karimganj on 03.06.2024.
¶5The Registry is directed to forthwith transmit LCR to the court of the Page No.# 3/3 learned District Judge, Karimganj and if need be by resorting to a special messenger, so that on the next date so fixed by this court, the learned First Appellate Court, i.e. the court of the learned District Judge, Karimganj is a position to take up the said appeal.
¶6This court is further of the opinion that the suit was filed is of the year 1998 and almost 26 years have passed. Under such circumstances, this court request the learned District Judge, Karimganj to make an endeavour to dispose of the said appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 6 months from the date of appearance of the parties.
¶7With the above observation, the Appeals stands disposed of.
J U D G E Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010018662007 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oSAO/4/2007o M/SoBoNoMAZUMDERoandoORSo JEWELLERSoFIRM,oMAINoROAD,oKARIMGANJoTOWN,oPO/PS/DIST.o KARIMGANJ,oASSAM. 2:oBHULAoNATHoMAZUMDER oS/OoLT.oPREMONATHoMAZUMDER 3:oASHISoMAZUMDER o 4:oUJJALoMAZUMDER oSL.NOS.o3and4oAREoTHEoSONSoOFoBHOLAoNATHoMAZUMDER oR/OoA.C.oSENoROAD oKARIMGANJoTOWN oPO/PS/DIST.oKARIMGANJ oASSAMo VERSUSo JAGADISHoCH.oBANIKo S/OoNITYANANDAoBANIKoOFoSILCHARoROAD,oKARIMGANJoTOWN,o PO/PS/DIST.oKARIMGANJoANDoPROP.oOFoM/S.oSANJUKTAoSWEETSoando SAVOURSoAToMAINoROAD,oKARIMGANJ. AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.SoKoGHOSHo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oMR.NoGoKUNDUoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.