Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010122512016 2026:GAU-AS:11895 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RSA/262/2016 HIFZA HAZARIKA W/O LATE MUSTAFFA ALI AHMED, R/O WARD NO. 14, NORTH LAKHIMPUR TOWN, KHELMATI MOUZA LAKHIMPUR, P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. VERSUS SMTI. MAYARANI DAS and 8 ORS. W/O LT. JATIN KR. DAS, R/O KHELMATI, WARD NO. 14, MAUZA LAKHIMPUR, P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. 2:ANOWAR HUSSAIN S/O LATE SARIF R/O KHELMATI WARD NO. a4 P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR MAUZA LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 3:MD ABDUL KHALEQUE S/O LATE SARIF R/O KHELMATI WARD NO. a4 P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR MAUZA LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 4:MD ABDUL MOTIN S/O LATE SARIF R/O KHELMATI WARD NO. a4 P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR Page No.# 2/5 MAUZA LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 5:MUSTT. JAHANARA BEGUM W/O LATE HABIBUDDIN HAZARIKA R/O C.D. ROAD W/NO- 7 MOUZA LAKHIMPUR P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 6:SRI BABU GOWALA S/O UNKNOWN R/O KHELMATI W/O -14 MOUZA LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR P.S. N.LAKHIM 7:STRUCK OFF VIDE HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DATED 16.07.2024 8:SRI SUNIL DAS S/O UNKNOWN R/O KHELMATI W/O -14 MOUZA LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR P.S. N.LAKHIM 9:MD IMDADUL HUSSAIN S/O LATE ABDUL WAHED R/O KHELMATI W/O -14 MOUZA LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR P.S. N.LAKHI Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.M SARMA, MR R I BHUYAN,MR. M H SAIKIA,MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN,MD. J U AHMED,MS.I GOHAIN,MS.K DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : MR.B K JAINR-1, MR. R K BHUYAN,MR.B K PURKAYASTHA(R-1),MS.M DASGUPTA(R-1) Page No.# 3/5 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 20.08.2026 Heard Mr. N.H. Mazarbhuiyan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard the learned senior counsel Mr. R.K. Bhuyan appearing for the respondents. 2. This is a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.07.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in Title Appeal No.07/2015 reversing the judgment and decree dated 04.03.2015 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, North Lakhimpur, in Title Suit No.05/2012. 3. The respondents filed the T.S. 05/2012 against the present appellant praying for a declaration that she has right, title and interest over the suit land and also prayed for ejectment of the present appellant. 4. The trial court framed 7(seven) issues and dismissed the suit. An appeal was preferred. The learned appellate court decided that issues nos. 3, 4 and 5 are required to be discussed and answered. Accordingly, the trial court decided those three issues and set aside the judgment of the trial court and decreed the suit accordingly. 5. Regarding how the first appellate court should write the judgment, in B.V. Nagesh v. H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy, (2010) 13 SCC 530, the Supreme Court observed as under - “3. How the regular first appeal is to be disposed of by the appellate court/High Court has been considered by this Court in various decisions. Order 41 CPC deals with appeals from original decrees. Among the various rules, Rule 31 mandates that the judgment of the appellate court shall state: (a) the points for determination; (b) the decision thereon; Page No.# 4/5 (c) the reasons for the decision; and (d) where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which the appellant is entitled. 4. The appellate court has jurisdiction to reverse or affirm the findings of the trial court. The first appeal is a valuable right of the parties and unless restricted by law, the whole case is therein open for rehearing both on questions of fact and law. The judgment of the appellate court must, therefore, reflect its conscious application of mind and record findings supported by reasons, on all the issues arising along with the contentions put forth, and pressed by the parties for decision of the appellate court. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. (Vide Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari [(2001) 3 SCC 179: JT (2001) 2 SCC 407] , SCC p. 188, para 15 and Madhukar v. Sangram [(2001) 4 SCC 756] , SCC p. 758, para 5.)” 6. In Laliteshwar Prasad Singh v. S.P. Srivastava, (2017) 2 SCC 415, it was held-- “12. As per Order 41 Rule 31 CPC, the judgment of the first appellate court must explicitly set out the points for determination, record its reasons thereon and to give its reasonings based on evidence. Order 41 Rule 31 CPC reads as under: “31. Contents, date and signature of judgment.—The judgment of the appellate court shall be in writing and shall state— (a) the points for determination; (b) the decision thereon; (c) the reasons for the decision; and (d) where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which the appellant is entitled; and shall at the time that it is propounded be signed and dated by the Judge or by the Judges concurring therein.” 7. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. 8. On a plain reading of the judgment of the appellate court, I have found that the appellate judgment is bad in law. This is a fit case for remand. The appellate court judgment and decree dated 22.07.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Lakhimpur, Page No.# 5/5 North Lakhimpur in Title Appeal No.07/2015 is set aside. The case is remanded to the learned first appellate court at Lakhimpur to pass a fresh judgment on all issues. The appellate court may hear oral arguments before passing the judgment. 9. The concerned parties shall have the liberty to file an appeal against the decree passed in the counter claim. With the aforesaid direction, the appeal is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant