Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010240122023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : FAO/75/2023 MD. ROYAL ALI S/O LATE JAMIR ALI, VILL.- NORTH JALUKBARI, P.O.- GAUHATI UNIVERSITY, P.S.- JALUKBARI, DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 781014. VERSUS PRADIP KUMAR JAIN S/O LATE BHAWARILAL JAIN, R/O MAIN BHAWAN, MALIGAON GATE GATE NO. 1, P.O.- MALIGAON, GUWAHATI- 11, P.S.- JALUKABARI, DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P CHALIHA, MS M ROY Advocate for the Respondent : MR K JAIN, MR. N ALAM,MS. B JAIN Linked Case : FAO/76/2023 MD. ROYAL ALI S/O LATE JAMIR ALI VILL.- NORTH JALUKBARI P.O.- GAUHATI UNIVERSITY Page No.# 2/5 P.S.- JALUKBARI DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 781014. VERSUS PRADIP KUMAR JAIN S/O LATE BHAWARILAL JAIN R/O MAIN BHAWAN JAIN MALIGAON GATE NO. 1 P.O.- MALIGAON GUWAHATI- 11 P.S.- JALUKBARI DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR. D P CHALIHA Advocate for : MR K JAIN appearing for PRADIP KUMAR JAIN BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 10-12-2025 These two appeal petition under order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC read with section 151 CPC are being taken up together as they are arising out of the same connected subject matter. 2. Heard Mr. D.P Chaliha, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. M. Roy, for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Alam for the sole respondent. 3. In FAO 75/2023, the appellant has assailed the order dated 15.07.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in Misc.(J) Case No.29/2023 in Title Suit 618/2022 by which an order of Page No.# 3/5 injunction was granted by the trial Court in favour of the respondent/defendant and restrained the plaintiff/appellant from raising any kind of nuisance, obstruction, threat and intimidation to the defendant/respondent. 4. Learned senior counsel has submitted that the respondent/defendant in the Misc(J) Case 29/2023 had failed to make out a prima facie case for grant of injunction as the respondent/defendant had failed to prove the real possession of the suit land. He has further submitted that the trial Court has ignored the balance of convenience over the suit property inasmuch as the appellant has possession over the suit land over which the respondent/defendant has been illegally trespassing. It is further submitted that the trial Court has acted beyond its jurisdiction by restraining the appellant/plaintiff from raising any kind of obstruction to the defendant/respondent. The learned senior counsel has therefore prayed that the impugned order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Misc (J) case No.29/2023 may be quashed and set aside. 5. In FAO 76/2023, the appellant has challenged the order dated 15.7.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge Kamrup (M) in Misc(J) 928/2022 by which the application for injunction prayed for by the plaintiff/appellant was rejected. 6. Learned senior counsel submits that the plaintiff/appellant in the Misc(J) case No.928/2022 had made out a prima facie case for grant of injunction. The plaintiff/appellant had claimed that the suit land belongs to him and proved the real possession of the suit land by producing old dag no. i.e new dag documents i.e trace map of possession. Page No.# 4/5 7. The plaintiff/appellant has purchased plot of land measuring 2 katha covered by dag no.229(old)/364(new), K.P.Patta No.9(old) 476(new) and another plot of land measuring 3 katha covered by dag No.230(old)/411(new) K.P.Patta No.4(old) 300(new) of Garpandukumarpara under JAlukbari mouza vide sale deed No.7070 dated 20.06.1975. Both the plots are adjacent and accordingly possession was handed over by the landlord and the appellant/plaintiff had annexed the certified trace maps of both the dags old and new. It is stated that the dispute arose over the dag no 229(old)/364(new). However, the trial Court without examining the documents properly rejected the application of the appellant/plaintiff praying for temporary injunction. 8. Learned counsel further states that the trial Court failed to appreciate the materials placed before it and held that the Court did not find any merit in the injunction prayer of the plaintiff/appellant. 9. It is the prayer of the appellant in FAO 76/2023 that the impugned order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Misc(J) No.928/2022 in Title Suit No.618/2022 may be quashed and set aside. 10. During the course of hearing, the learned Sr. counsel for the appellant has submitted that the proceedings of Title Suit No.618/2022 is coming to an end before the learned trial Court. The learned counsel for the respondent/defendant also submits that the construction of the building by him over the suit land is also in the final stages of completion. The learned Sr. counsel for the appellant submits that the interest of justice would be met if this Court disposes of the present appeal petitions with a direction that no third party interest should be created pending disposal of the Title Page No.# 5/5 Suit No.618/2022. The learned counsel for the respondent/defendant has not objected to the said prayer. 11. This Court has considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the pleadings in the two appeal petitions. A perusal of the impugned order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Misc(J) 29/2023 in FAO 75/2023 shows that the learned trial Court has also directed that if any third party interest is created upon the completion of construction, the sale deed in question shall clearly stipulate that the matter is subjudice and that any sale is subject to the ultimate decision of the suit. 12. Accordingly, the order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Misc(J) Case No.928/2022 in Title Suit 618/2022 is quashed and set aside and FAO 76/2023 is merged with FAO 75/2023 through this common order. 13. During the pendency of the two appeal petitions herein, the learned counsel for the parties have brought to the notice of this Court that the building being constructed over the suit land by the respondent/defendant is nearly complete and proceeding of the Title Suit 618/2022 is also in the final stage. Considering the above facts and circumstances, no interference is made to the impugned order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Misc(J) case No.29/2023 arising out of Title Suit No.618/2022 which is challenged in FAO 75/2023. However, it is directed that no third party interest shall be created in respect of the suit land or the building being constructed by the respondent/defendant during the pendency of the Title Suit 618/2022. FAO No.75/2023 and FAO 76/2023 stands disposed with the above observations and directions. JUDGE Comparing Assistant