Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2023 DAILYLAW 1715 (GAU)

NASIR UDDIN LASKAR v. JURI HAZARIKA AND 8 ORS.

I.A.(Civil)/3131/2023 · 2026-03-10

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010201602023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3131/2023 NASIR UDDIN LASKAR S/O LATE WAZID ALI LASKAR, VILL.- KANCHANPUR PT- I, P.O.- RATAKANDI, P.S. AND DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788155. VERSUS JURI HAZARIKA AND 8 ORS. W/O LT. MRIGANKA DAS, R/O SHIV NAGAR, 6TH BY LANE P.S. SADAR, DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM). 2:AUTRAYEE KSHYAB D/O LT. MRIGANKA DAS R/O SHIV NAGAR 6TH BY LANE P.S. SADAR DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM). 3:KARUNA DAS W/O BABUL CH. DAS R/O SHIV NAGAR 6TH BY LANE P.S. SADAR DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM). 4:BABUL CH. DAS R/O SHIV NAGAR 6TH BY LANE P.S. SADAR DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM). 5:MADHAB CH. DEB S/O MUKUL CH. DEB VILL.- SINGLACHERRA CHA-BAGAN Page No.# 2/3 P.O. AND P.S.- RATABARI DIST.- KARIMGANJ (ASSAM) PIN- 788713. 6:MD. SAIDUR RAHMAN LASKAR S/O HAJI JUNAB ALI LASKAR VILL.- DHOLAI PART-V P.O.- DHOLAI MOLAI P.S.- KATLICHERRA DIST.- HAILAKANDI (ASSAM) PIN- 788161. 7:NIRENDRA CH. DEB S/O LT. BISHESWAR DEB VILL. AND P.O.- CHANTILLA P.S.- RATABARI DIST.- KARIMGANJ (ASSAM) PIN- 788713. 8:THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. SILCHAR BRANCH CACHAR ASSAM. 9:THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. SILCHAR BRANCH CACHAR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A H ALAMGIR, Advocate for the Respondent : MR C PHUKAN (R-8,9), MS. M SAIKIA (R-8,9),MS. P BORTHAKUR (R-8,9),MR. R GOSWAMI (R-8,9),A. N. H PHOM (R-8,9),MS. S CHAKRABORTY (R-8,9) Linked Case : NASIR UDDIN LASKAR Page No.# 3/3 VERSUS JURI HAZARIKA AND 8 ORS. B ------------ Advocate for : MR. A H ALAMGIR Advocate for : appearing for JURI HAZARIKA AND 8 ORS. B BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 11.03.2026 None appears for the applicant, on call. By order dated 05.05.2025, the applicant was directed to take fresh steps on respondent Nos. 5 and 7 but office note dated 10.12.2025 indicates that no such steps have been taken. Therefore, the applicant failed to take steps after 7 months from the date of the order dated 05.05.2025 and today on call, none appears for the applicant. Accordingly, the I.A. stands dismissed for non-prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant