Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26598 (GAU)

SHRI KANOUL KUMAR DAS AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

I.A.(Civil)/1659/2018 · 2025-11-18

Mridul Kumar Kalita

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010099962018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1659/2018 SHRI KANOUL KUMAR DAS AND ANR S/O LATE KRIPESH CHANDRA DAS VILL. ISHWARSHREE , P.O.AND P.S. NILAMBAZAR , KARIMGANJ ,ASSAM 2: SRI KAUSHIK DAS S/O LATE KRIPESH CHANDRA DAS VILL. ISHWARSHREE P.O.AND P.S. NILAMBAZAR KARIMGANJ ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS ASSAM. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KARIMGANJ 3:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER KARIMGANJ 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER NILAMBAZAR 5:KUMUD RANJAN DEY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ISWARSHREE P.O.AND P.S. NILAMBAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN. 788004 6:JAGADISH CHANDRA DUTTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ISWARSHREE P.O.AND P.S. NILAMBAZAR DIST. KARIMGANJ Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM PIN. 78800 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DUTTA, MS. N MODI,MR. C SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, in RSA Case No. 135/2018 with RSA Case No. 135/2018 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 19.11.2025 1. Heard Ms. K. Bora, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. K. Bhattacharya, the learned Government counsel appearing for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the applicant for condoning a delay of only 2(two) days in preferring the connected regular second appeal, whereby the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2017, passed by the court of the learned Civil Judge, Karimganj in Title Appeal No. 01/2017, has been impugned. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the delay of only 2(two) days has been occasioned in preferring the connected regular second appeal and the said delay has been explained by the applicant in paragraph Nos. 2,3,4 and 5 of the application. 4. On the other hand, the learned Government counsel, Mr. K. Page No.# 3/3 Bhattacharya submits that since the delay is of only 2(two) days, he does not have any objection if the same is condoned. 5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the grounds shown by the applicant in their application to be sufficient grounds which prevented them from filing the connected regular second appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, the delay of 2(two) days is hereby condoned and this interlocutory application(civil) is allowed. 6. Let the connected RSA be listed for hearing under Order 41, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 after a week. 7. List accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant