Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10993 (GAU)

ON THE DEATH OF MOFIZUR RAHMAN BOAH,HIS LEGAL HEIRS , SUFIYA RAHMAN BORA AND 3 ORS. v. MD. UBEDUR RAHMAN BORAH AND 12 ORS.

FAO/17/2023 · 2025-06-24

Robin Phukan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010081002023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : FAO/17/2023 ON THE DEATH OF MOFIZUR RAHMAN BOAH,HIS LEGAL HEIRS , SUFIYA RAHMAN BORA AND 3 ORS. W/O LATE MOFIZUR RAHMAN BORAH, R/O DOLPHIN ENCLAVE, NEAR GNRC SUPERMARKET, P.O. AND P.S.- DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, DIST.- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. 2: TASVINA RAHMAN BORA D/O LATE MOFIZUR RAHMAN BORAH R/O DOLPHIN ENCLAVE NEAR GNRC SUPERMARKET P.O. AND P.S.- DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 3: FAZLUL KABIR BORA S/O LATE MOFIZUR RAHMAN BORAH R/O DOLPHIN ENCLAVE NEAR GNRC SUPERMARKET P.O. AND P.S.- DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 4: ASFIYA RAHMAN BORA D/O LATE MOFIZUR RAHMAN BORAH Page No.# 2/6 R/O DOLPHIN ENCLAVE NEAR GNRC SUPERMARKET P.O. AND P.S.- DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. SERIAL NO. 2 3 AND 4 ARE BEING REP. BY THEIR ATTORNEY HOLDER OR MOTHER NAMELY SUFIYA RAHMAN BORA THAT IS THE APPELLANT NO. 1 VERSUS MD. UBEDUR RAHMAN BORAH AND 12 ORS. S/O LATE DR. MUHIBUR RAHMAN BORAH, R/O WARD NO. 6, SHANTI NAGAR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN, P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR, MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. 2:MD ULFATUR RAHMAN BORAH S/O LATE DR. MUHIBUR RAHMAN BORAH PERMANENT RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 6 SHANTI NAGAR NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 2ND FLOOR BLOCK- B PROTECH HERITAGE MOTHER TERESA ROAD GEETANAGAR GUWAHATI- 781024. 3:JYOTI PRASAD HAZARIKA C/O HOTEL NANDIKESHOR S/O LATE MAHENDRA HAZARIKA VILL. AND P.O.- GORUMURIA P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR Page No.# 3/6 MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787032. 4:SYED HAMIDUR RAHMAN S/O LATE SAHIDUR RAHMAN R/O WARD NO. 8 NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 5:THE SECRETARY DEPTT. OF REVENUE ASSAM SACHIVALAYA DISPUR GUWAHATI. 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DIST.- LAKHIMPUR NORTH LAKHIMPUR. 7:THE CIRCLE OFFICER NORTH LAKHIMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST.- LAKHIMPUR. 8:MD. MUKIBUR RAHMAN BORAH @ BUBULU S/O LATE DR. MUHIBUR RAHMAN BORAH PERMANENT RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 11 K.B. ROAD NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN HAJI HUNESHWAR BORUAH PATH P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001. 9:MAHMUDUR RAHMAN BORAH S/O LATE DR. MUHIBUR RAHMAN BORAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 11 K.B. ROAD NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN Page No.# 4/6 HAJI HUNESHWAR BORUAH PATH P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001. 10:MUSSTT. ENU BEGUM W/O LATE MAZIDUR RAHMAN BORAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 6 ASTC ROAD P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001. 11:TAHERA NASIR RAHMAN BORAH D/O LATE MAZIDUR RAHMAN BORAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 6 ASTC ROAD P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001. 12:SUCHAN SAHIN RAHMAN BORAH D/O LATE MAZIDUR RAHMAN BORAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 6 ASTC ROAD P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001. 13:JISSAN JENIFAR MAZID S/O LATE MAZIDUR RAHMAN BORAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 6 ASTC ROAD P.O. AND P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR MOUZA AND DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 787001 Page No.# 5/6 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SAILENDRA DEKA, MR J DAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. D CHOUDHURY (R-2,3,4),MS P BARUAH (R- 1),MR. D DEKA(R-1),MS N T MANPOONG(R-1),MR. B DEKA (R-1),SC, REVENUE BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 25.06.2025 Heard Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. P.M. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent No.1(i), 1(ii) and 1(iii), Mr. D. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4, 8 to 13, Mr. T.R. Gogoi, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 and Mr. J. Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department, appearing for the respondent No.5. 2. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants submits that this appeal was preferred under Order 43 Rule 1(k) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the order dated 10.03.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Lakhimpur, in Petition Nos.1253/2022 and 1254/2022, arising out of Title Suit No.13/2018. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 10.03.2023, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, as the petitioner has failed to explain the delay in filing those two petitions. 4. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants further submits that during the pendency of this appeal, both the parties have settled the matter amicably and they have also executed one deed of compromise and has produced a copy of the same before this Court and on the strength of the same, Mr. Deka has contended to allow the appeal. 5. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1(i), 1(ii) and 1(iii), Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4, 8 to 13, Mr. Gogoi, learned Page No.# 6/6 Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 and Mr. Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department, appearing for the respondent No.5, submit that they have no objection in the event of allowing this appeal. 6. Taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and also considering the facts and circumstances on the record and also the deed of compromise produced before this Court by the learned counsel for the appellants and further considering the grounds mentioned in the petition, this Court is inclined to allow this petition as the delay in filing the petition stands explained in the petition. 7. In terms of above, this appeal stands allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 10.03.2023 stands set aside and quashed. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 10.07.2025. 8. The deed of compromise produced before this Court shall be part of the record. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE