Motilal Choudhury and Anr v. Sri Makhan Lal Deb and 28 Ors

ORDER

16.08.2024 Heard Mr. P.K. Roy, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the applicants and also heard Mr. A.R. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Page No.# 5/6 Mr. Roy, learned Senior counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have caused service of notice upon the respondent Nos.3 to 28 by substituted mode through paper publication and submitted one affidavit dated 24.05.2024 and as such the notice deemed to have been served upon them. It appears that the notice was duly published in two local daily newspapers, one in Prantajyoti Dainik published from Silchar and another in Northeast Express. Yet, the respondent Nos.3 to 28 chooses not to contest this application. It is submitted at the Bar that since service has already been completed, the matter may be heard. Accordingly, both the parties are heard. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 81 days in filing connected second appeal against the judgment and decree dated

23.06.2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Karimganj, in Title Appeal No.27/2016. It is to be noted here that vide aforementioned judgment and decree 23.06.2017, the learned Civil Judge, Karimganj, has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 27.07.2016 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Karimganj, in Title Suit No.8/2009. The learned Senior counsel for the applicants submits that the wife of the applicant No.1 was suffering from ailment of her eyes and also on account of long puja vacation the counsel was out of station, for which the applicants could not contact him and that the delay here in this case is not deliberate, but it is circumstantial and the same has been explained in paragraph 2 of the application and that there is arguable point in the appeal and therefore, it is contended to condone the delay. On the other hand, Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that he has no objection in the event of condoning the delay of 81 days in filing connected regular second appeal. Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both the parties, I have carefully gone through the application specially the statement and averment made in paragraph 2 of the application. And it appears that the delay has been explained Page No.# 6/6 sufficiently here in this application, the delay is not deliberate and intentional but circumstantial and therefore, this Court is inclined to condone the same. In terms of above, I.A. stands disposed of. Registry to register and number the connected appeal and list the same before this Court. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE

PageoNo.#o1/6 GAHC010084952018 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/1463/2018o MOTILALoCHOUDHURYoANDoANRo S/OoLATEoKRIPENDRAoCHOUDHURYoVILL.oBAZERGHAT,oP.O.oBAZERGHAT,o DIST.oKARIMGANJ 2:oSMTIoCHAYAoRANIoCHOUDHURY oW/OoSRIoMANIKoBHATTACHARJEEo R/OoBIVEKANANDAoPALLYo P.OoANDoP.S.oRAMKRISHNAoNAGARo DIST.oKARIMAGANo VERSUSo SRIoMAKHANoLALoDEBoANDo28oORSo S/OoLATEoGONGESHoCHANDRAoDEB 2:SRIoPHANIoBHUSANoDEB oS/OoLATEoGONGESHoCHANDRAoDEB 3:SRIoCHUNNIoDEB oS/OoLATEoGONGESHoCHANDRAoDEB 4:SRIoGOPALoDEB oRESPONDENTSoNO.1TOo4oSONSoOFoLATEoGONGESHoCHANDRAoDEBo.VILLo ANDoP.O.oBAZARGHATo P.S.oRATABARIo.DIST.oKARIMGANJ 5:SMTIoRINAoDEB oW/OoRONIoDEBo D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEBo.VILL.oANDoP.O.oKAYASTHAGRAM o 6:SMTIoLILAoDHAR oW/OoSUDHIRoCHANDRAoDHARo PageoNo.#o2/6 o D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEBoVILL.ANDoP.O.oBAZARGHAT o PS.oRATBARIoDIST.oKARIMGANJ. 7:SMTIoPURNIMAoDEB oW/OoJHANTUoDEBo D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEBo VILL.oKALACHERA oP.O.oBAZARGHAT oP.S.oBAZARGHATo DIST.oKARIMGANJ oASSAM 8:SMTIoANITAoDHAR oW/OoMONILALoDHARo D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEB oVILL.oMOHAMCHERRA oP.O.oDULLAVCHERRA.oDIST.oKARIMGANJ 9:SMTIoSUMITAoDEY oW/OoSAILESHoDEYo D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEB oVILL.oANDoP.O.oANIPURo 10:SMTIoRANIoBALAoDEB oW/OoLATEoGOPESHoCHANDRAoDEBo VILL.oANDoP.O.oBAZARGHAT oP.S.oRATABARIoDIST.oKARIMGANJ.oASSAM 11:MANIKoDEB oS/OoLATEoGOPESHoCHANDRAoDEB 12:MOLOYoKANTIoDEB oS/OoLATEoGOPESHoCHANDRAoDEB 13:AJOYoDEB oS/OoLATEoGOPESHoCHANDRAoDEB 14:NIRMALoDEB oRESPONDENTSoNO.11TOo14oAREoTHEoSONSoOFoLATEoGOPESHoCHANDRAo DEBo oVILLoANDoP.O.oBAZARGHAT oP.S.oRATABARI oDIST.oKARIMGANJ 15:SMTIoRATNAoDEB PageoNo.#o3/6 oW/OoNILUoDEBo D/OoLATEoGANGESHoCHANDRAoDEBo VILL.oANDoP.O.oBAZARGHAT oP.S.oRATABARIo 16:SMTIoBIVAoDEB oW/OoKARUNAoDEBo D/OoOFoGOPESoCHANDRAoDEBo VILLoANDoBALIPIPLA o PATHEKANDIo oDIST.oKARIMGANJoASSAMo. 17:SMTIoJHARNAoDEB oW/OoLATEoBABULoDEB 18:SRIoRAHULoDEB oS/OoLATEoBABULoDEB 19:SMTIoMAMONoDEB oD/OoLATEoBABULoDEB 20:BIMALoDEB oS/OoLATEoPRANASHoDEBo RESPONDENTo17oTOo20oAREoTHEoRESIDENCEoOFoVILL.oANDoP.O.o BAZERGHAT oP.S.oRATABARI oDIST.oKARIMGANJ. 21:SMTIoMIRAoDEB oW/OoBISHUoDEBo VILL.oANDoP.O.oNIVIAoBAZARGHAT o oP.S.oRATABARI DIST.oKARIMGANJ.ASSAM 22:SMTIoMITRAoDEB oW/OoSRIoRONEEoDEBoD/OoPARESHoCHANDRAoDEBo VILLoANDoP.O.oANIPUR oDIST.oKARIMGANJ 23:SMTIoRANIoBALAoDEB oW/OoLATEoDINESHoCHANDRAoDEB 24:NANIoDEB oS/OoLATEoDINESHoCHANDRAoDEB Page No.# 4/6 25:JHANTU DEB S/O LATE DINESH CHANDRA DEB 26:MINTU DEB S/O LATE DINESH CHANDRA DEB 27:NANTU DEB RESPONDENT NO .23 TO 27 ARE THE S/O LATE DINESH CHANDRA DEB. RESIDENT OF DURGA NAGAR AGARTALA TRIPURA 28:SMTI BANI DEB W/O BABUL DEB D/O DINESH CHANDRA DEB RESIDENT OF DURGA NAGAR AGARTALA TRIPURA. 29:SMTI PAMPARANI DEB W/O SIBUL DEB D/O PARESH CHANDRA DEB VILL AND P.O. LALCHERRA DHARMANAGAR TRIPUR Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROY, MS. M DUTTA,MR A CHAKRABORTY,MR. S K CHAKRABORTY Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN