Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010023262025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/10/2025 SMT. SAKUNTALA SARDA and 21 Ors W/O, LATE SHIV SANKAR SARDA 2: SRI SUNIL SARDA S/O LATE SHIV SANKAR SARDA 3: SMT. MEERA SARDA W/O LATE SUJIT SARDA 4: SMT. SHIVANI SARDA D/O SUJIT SARDA 5: SMT. SHREYA SARDA D/O SUJIT SARDA 6: SMT. LILA DEVI SARDA D/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA 7: SRI RAMESH SARDA S/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA 8: SRI MAHESH SARDA S/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA 9: SRI UMESH SARDA S/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA 10: SMT. SUNITA SARDA D/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA 11: SMT. VINITA SARDA D/O LATE GOURI SANKAR SARDA Page No.# 2/7 12: SRI RAVI SANKAR SARDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 13: SMT. SANGEETA SARDA W/O LATE SANTOSH SARDA 14: SRI SUMEET SARDA S/O LATE SANTOSH SARDA 15: SRI PRASHANT SARDA S/O LATE SANTOSH SARDA 16: SRI KUMAR BAGRI S/O LATE CHANDRA SARDA AND GOKUL CHAND BAGRI 17: SMT. MANISHA BAGRI D/O LATE CHANDRA SARDA AND GOKUL CHAND BAGRI R/O JANIGANJ BAZAR 18: SMT. INDU SARDA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 19: SMT. USHA SARDA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS 20: SMT. SEEMA SARDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 21: SMT. NEEMA SARDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 22: SMT. ASHA SARDA ALL RESIDENTS OF JANIGANJ BAZAR P.O-SILCHAR P.S- SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSA VERSUS SMT SUSHILA DIXIT WIFE OF SHYAM SUNDAR DIXIT, D/O LATE SURENDRA NARAYAN SUKUL 2:SMT SUNITA DUBEY WIFE OF NARAYAN DUBEY D/O LATE SURENDRA NARAYAN SUKUL Page No.# 3/7 3:SMT MANJU GURSAHANI DAUGHTERS OF LATE SURENDER NARAYAN SUKUL 4:SMT KUSUM SUKUL WIFE OF LATE BISWAJIT SUKUL 5:SMT ANURADHA SUKUL D/O LATE BISWAJIT SUKUL 6:SMT ANUREKHA SUKUL D/O LATE BISWAJIT SUKUL 7:PRIYANKA SUKUL D/O LATE BISWAJIT SUKUL 8:SANGITA KURMI WIFE OF BABUL KURMI D/O LATE MANORAM DEVI 9:ANUP AGNIHOTRI SON OF LATE SURMONI AGNIHOTRI 10:SRI AJOY AGNIHOTRI SON OF LATE SURMONI AGNIHOTRI 11:SMT SAROJ SUKUL D/O LATE SARBAJIT SUKUL 12:POONAM SUKUL D/O LATE SARBAJIT SUKUL 13:SONIA SUKUL D/O LATE SARBAJIT SUKUL 14:SMT SIBANI SUKUL WIFE OF LATE BIKRAM SUKUL 15:SMTI. GEETA SUKUL WIFE OF LATE AMARJIT SUKUL 16:SRI JITENDRA SUKUL SON OF LATE AMARJIT SUKUL 17:SRI DIPAK SUKUL SON OF LATE AMARJIT SUKUL 18:SMT GOURI SUKUL Page No.# 4/7 WIFE OF MANISH SINGH AND DAUGHTER OF AMARJIT SUKUL ALL RESIDENTS OF CENTRAL ROAD SILCHAR TOWN DIST. CACHAR ASSAM For the petitioner (s) : Mr. D. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate Mr. C. Gogoi, Advocate For the respondent (s) : XXX BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 10.02.2025 Heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. C. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. The instant proceedings which is initiated by invoking the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution is to a challenge to the order dated 29.11.2024 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024. Taking into account the order which was passed on 29.11.2024 and further the direction so passed on 28.10.2024 in CRP(IO) No.431/2024, this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the instant proceedings is disposed of at this stage, even without issuance of notice upon the respondents. 3. From the records, it is apparent that against the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2022 passed in Title Appeal No.14/2000, an Page No.# 5/7 execution proceedings being Title Execution Case No.55/2023 was instituted by the decree holders. In the said proceedings, an application was filed by the judgment debtors under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the Code’) which was registered and numbered as Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024. When the said application was filed under Section 47 of the Code, the learned Executing Court issued notice vide an order dated 20.09.2024 upon the decree holders. Being aggrieved by the issuance of notice to the decree holders on the ground that the decree holders were duly represented in the Title Execution Case No.55/2023, the decree holders approached this Court by filing a proceeding which was registered and numbered as CRP(IO) No.431/2024. 4. This Court vide an order dated 28.10.2024 taking into account that the decree holders were duly represented by the engaged counsel interfered with the order dated 20.09.2024 and directed the learned Executing Court to proceed to hear and dispose of the Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024 in Title Execution Case No.55/2023 within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. 5. It shocks and surprises this Court to see the impugned order dated 29.11.2024 by which the learned Executing Court, i.e. the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Cachar, Silchar Page No.# 6/7 had disposed of Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024. The relevant paragraphs of the said order is reproduced herein under:- “Heard the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Upon perusal of the Order of Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in Case No. CRP(IO)/431/2024 dtd. 28.10.2024, it transpires that the Order dtd. 28.09.2024 of this Court had been set aside and quashed. Further, it also appears that the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court had directed to hear and disposed of the instant Misc. Case no. 138/2024 in Title Execution No. 55/2023, in accordance with law, as soon as practicable. Furthermore, it is also directed by Hon'ble Gauhati High Court that this court, being the executing court shall make an endeavour to dispose of the petition U/S 47, read with Section 151 of CPC within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the Order dtd. 28.10.2024. Accordingly, the instant Misc(J) Case 138/2024 arising out of Title Execution Case No. 55/2023 is disposed of as per the Order of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court. The Title Execution case No. 55/2023 is restored to its previous stage.” 6. From a perusal of the contents of the above quoted order, it would be seen that the learned Executing Court had merely disposed of Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024 by a single stroke of the pen which is contrary to the well settled principles of law. The Page No.# 7/7 learned Executing Court ought to have decided the said application under Section 47 of the Code which was registered as Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024 on merits, and thereupon, should have disposed of the same by assigning reasons which is one of the hallmarks of any judicial order. 7. Taking into account that the impugned order dated 29.11.2024 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024 shocks the judicial conscience of this Court, exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is required and necessary. Accordingly, the impugned order 29.11.2024 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.138/2024 is set aside and quashed. 8. The learned Executing Court, i.e. the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Cachar, Silchar is directed to decide the Section 47 application on its merits as per the settled principles of law and then dispose of the same within 2 (two) months from 13.02.2025 which is the next day fixed in the execution proceedings. 9. In view of the above, the instant proceedings stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant