KAMRUL ALOM CHOUDHURY v. ON THE DEATH OF LATE KODOR ALI HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ORS
CRP/109/2022 · 2025-08-28
Parthivjyoti Saikia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19605 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19605 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010214042022
2025:GAU-AS:11573
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/109/2022 KAMRUL ALOM CHOUDHURY S/O LATE RAIS ALI CHOUDHURY, R/O VILL-NARAYANPUR, P.O. AND P.S.- HAILAKANDI VERSUS ON THE DEATH OF LATE KODOR ALI HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ORS (HIS LEGAL HEIRS) 1.1:ASARUN NESSA LASKAR W/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.2:RAJIA BEGUM LASKAR D/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.3:ABDUL KHALIK LASKAR S/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.4:ABDUL NUR LASKAR S/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI
Page No.# 2/3 1.5:MONWARA BEGUM LASKAR D/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.6:RABIA BEGUM LASKAR D/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.7:ABDUL MANIK LASKAR D/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 1.8:SOFIA BEGUM LASKAR D/O LATE KODOR ALI LASKAR R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI 2:MD. TAYABUR RAHMAN BORBHUIYAN S/O LT. MATLIB ALI BORBHUIYAN R/O NARAYANPUR PART-II P.O.-WEST CHANDPUR P.S. AND DIST-HAILAKAND Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHOUDHURY, DR. B. C. BORAH,MS. A KAUSHAR,MR. S ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : MS. R CHOUDHURY (r-1.1 to 1.8), MR. S H RAHMAN,MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY (r-1.1 to 1.8)
Page No.# 3/3 :: BEFORE ::
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 29.08.2025
The learned counsel Mr. S.H. Rahman appearing for the petitioner submits that he has instructions to withdraw this revision petition. It may be mentioned that Mr. S.H. Rahman has been shown as the counsel for the respondent in the cause list. Mr. Rahman has submitted that it has been erroneously shown in the cause list. He, actually, represents the petitioner. After hearing Mr. Rahman, his prayer for withdrawal is allowed. The revision petition is disposed of on withdrawal.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant