Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25750 (GAU)

M/S CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE (PROP- SREELAL TUSNIAL AND ORS ) v. BHUWALKA TRADING AND TEA COMPANY PVT LTD AND 2 ORS

CRP(IO)/82/2024 · 2025-10-26

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010025312024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/82/2024 M/S CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE (PROP- SREELAL TUSNIAL AND ORS ) HUF, REPRESENTED BY ITS KARTA, MR. ROHIT KUMAR SL MAHESHWARI, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O- SREELAL TOSHNIWAL MAHESHWARI, R/O- CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE, P.S. ALGAPUR, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788150 VERSUS BHUWALKA TRADING AND TEA COMPANY PVT LTD AND 2 ORS (UNIT- AENAKHAL TEA COMPANY) (TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR, BHUWALKA TRADING AND TEA COMPANY PVT. LTD.) HEAD OFFICE AT 12, PRETORIA STREET, ASPIRATIONS VINTAGE, 3RD FLOOR, FLAT NO. 3B, KOLKATA- 700071 AND REGD. OFFICE AT 9/1, MIDDLE TONE ROAD, KOLKATA- 700071 CARRYING ON BUSINESS INTER-ALIA, AS OWNER OF AENAKHAL TEA ESTATE, P.O. MONACHERRA, P.S. LALA, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 2:M/S CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AND REGISTERED OFFICE AT 231 NETAJI SUBHASH ROAD 8TH FLOOR ROOM NO.8 KOLKATA- 700001 3:CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE UNIT (TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CHANDYPORE TEA ESTATE) P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR P.S. ALGAPUR DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR N Z CHOUDHURY,MR N A Page No.# 2/2 MAZARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. K K DEY (R1), MR ARINDAM BARUAH(R-1),MS N KALITA(R-1),MR G CHOUDHURY (R-1),MR V K BAROOAH (R1) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 27.10.2025 Heard Mr. N.Z. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. T. Deka, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1. 2. Mr. Choudhury has submitted that in the Trial Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hailakandi the decree has been fully satisfied and therefore, the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting with this Revision Petition before this Court. 3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. The present Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of on being withdrawn by the petitioners. JUDGE Comparing Assistant