Ashim Ranjan Modak v. Md. Abdul Wahid Choudhury

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010239172022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCRP/121/2022o ASHIMoRANJANoMODAKo S/O-oANILoMUDAK,o RESIDENToOFoSToROAD,o P.O.oANDoP.S.-oBADARPUR,o DISTRICT-oHAILAKANDIo(ASSAM),o PIN-o788710. VERSUSo MD.oABDULoWAHIDoCHOUDHURYo SONoOFoMD.oABDULoHAMIDoCHOUDHURY,o RESIDENToOFoVILLAGE-oDIGIRPAR,o P.S.-oBADARPUR,oDISTRICT-oKARIMGANJo(ASSAM),o PIN-o788710. AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oSoKoGHOSHo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oMRoBoSINHAoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ::kBEFOREk::k HON'BLEkMR.kJUSTICEkPARTHIVJYOTIkSAIKIA kOkkkRkkkDkkkEkkkRk

28.02.2024 Heard Mr. S.K. Ghosh, leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sinha, learned counsel representing the respondent/caveator.

2.ooooooo This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India Page No.# 2/3 challenging the judgment and order dated 16.09.2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Hailakandi in Misc. Appeal No.01/202.

¶3Both sides are in the midst of a legal battle in Title Suit No.81/2019. The respondent, being the defendant before the trial court filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was registered as Misc. Case No.146/2019. After hearing both sides, the trial court refused to grant temporary injunction.

¶4Thereafter, the said defendant filed an appeal before the learned Civil Judge, Hailakandi, which was registered as Misc. Appeal No.01/2022. The appellate court allowed the appeal and directed the present petitioner/the plaintiff before the trial court, not to change the nature and feather of the suit land and also restrained from alienating the suit land by sale, gift, lease, mortgage etc. The appellate court also restrained the plaintiff from creating charge upon the suit land.

¶5Mr. Ghosh submits that there is nothing wrong in the directions issued by the appellate court. According to Mr. Ghosh, the trial court issued the said directions on erroneous interpretation of factual scenario as well as the law.

¶6Mr. Sinha, per contra, submits that he has no objection if both sides comply with the directions issued by the learned appellate court.

¶7I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.

¶8In a different way the appellate court actually directed both sides to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property. I am of the considered opinion that no prejudice has been caused to the present petitioner /the plaintiff before the trial court when the aforesaid directions was passed by the learned appellate court. Page No.# 3/3

¶9Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that there is nothing wrong in the findings of the learned appellate court. The present civil revision petition being devoid of any merit, stands dismissed accordingly. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant