Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010019462025 2025:GAU-AS:2664 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/9/2025 SANJAY KR. SHAH AND ANR S/O KEDARNATH SHAH, R/O BIKASHPUR, NATIONAL COLONY, BALUGADA, TINSUKIA TOWN, P.O., P.S. AND DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN- 786125 2: MD. YASIN S/O LATE JOG MOHAMMAD R/O C/O SRI DAMBARUDHAR SAIKIA BORDOLOI NAGAR GILLAPUKHURI ROAD P.O. P.S. AND DIST- TINSUKIA ASSA VERSUS SMTI. JAHANARA BEGUM @ SABANA BEGUM AND ANR W/O MD. NOOR ALAM, R/O JYOTINAGAR, NEW DEVELOPMENT AREA, P.O., P.S. AND DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125 2:MANOJ RAI S/O RAMNATH RAI R/O NEW DEVELOPMENT JYOTINAGAR P.O. P.S. AND DIST- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN-78612 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM, A R MONDAL,MR A HAWARI Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 04.04.2025 Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 12.11.2024, passed by the learned Special Tribunal (Additional District and Sessions Judge), Tinsukia, in Misc. (J) Case No. 05/2023, arising out of Land Grabbing Case No. 01/2018. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 12.11.2024, the learned Special Tribunal (Additional District and Sessions Judge), Tinsukia had dismissed the petition No. 1345/2024, filed by the petitioner for fixing another date for cross-examination. 4. Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had instituted one land grabbing case, being Land Grabbing Case No. 01/2018 and on 12.11.2024, the case was fixed for cross-examination of the petitioners’ witness. But, they could not present before the court as they had gone to Bihar to celebrate Chhath Puja and on that ground, filed a petition, being petition No. 1345/2024, for fixing another date. But, the learned trial court had dismissed the petition and also dismissed the Misc. (J) Case No. 05/2023. 5. To a pointed query of this court, Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners had earlier filed adjournment petitions on several occasions and the learned trial court had allowed the same. But, on 12.11.2024, the learned trial court had dismissed the petition filed by the petitioners and consequently, the Misc. (J) Case No. 05/2023 was also dismissed and as such, the impugned order so passed by the learned trial court is illegal and Page No.# 3/4 arbitrary and therefore, it is required to be set aside. 6. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the impugned order, dated 12.11.2024, passed by the learned Special Tribunal (Additional District and Sessions Judge), Tinsukia, in Misc. (J) Case No. 05/2023, arising out of Land Grabbing Case No. 01/2018. 7. It appears that the learned trial court had fixed the case for evidence in affidavit on 22.02.2024 and on that day, evidence in affidavit was filed. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 22.03.2024, for cross-examination. But, the petitioners remained absent by filing a petition on the ground that one of the relatives of the petitioners had expired. On 08.04.2024, they filed another adjournment petition on the ground that petitioners were sick, but no medical document was produced. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 24.04.2024, on which also the same ground was assigned without any medical document. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 31.05.2024 and 03.07.2024, wherein also adjournment was taken on the ground that one of the petitioner’s mother was sick. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 19.08.2024 and 23.09.2024, wherein again they took adjournment on the ground that one of the petitioner is sick, but no medical document was produced. Thereafter, on 21.10.2024, last chance was granted by the learned trial court. But, on that day also they remained absent on account of Karwa Chauth festival. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 29.10.2024 and again on 12.11.2024. But, on that day i.e. 12.11.2024, also they remained absent before the court on the ground that they had gone to Bihar to celebrate Chhath Puja. 8. Thus, it is apparent that sufficient opportunities were granted to the petitioners to face the cross-examination. But, the petitioners had failed to avail the same for this or that ground, even without substantiating the same, in their Page No.# 4/4 petitions. It is also apparent that after giving last chance also the learned trial court had fixed the case on two more occasions. But, they had failed to avail the same. 9. Thus, having examined the impugned order dated 12.11.2024, in the light of the aforementioned facts, this court is of the considered opinion that the learned trial court had rightly dismissed the petition No. 1345/2024 and the Misc. (J) Case No. 05/2023, after giving fair opportunity to the petitioners and the same suffers from no infirmity or illegality requiring any interference of this court. 10. Accordingly, this CRP stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant