Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010186922026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3079/2026 SMTI NIVA BANIKYA AND ORS DO LATE TARINI CHARAN BANIKYA, WO LATE BHUBAN DAS, RO RANI ABHAYESWARI PATH, WARD NO 11, ABHAYAPURI, PS ABHAYAPURI, DIST BONGAIGAON, PIN 783384 2: SHRI MANDEEP DAS SO BHUBAN DAS RO RANI ABHAYESWARI PATH WARD NO 11 ABHAYAPURI PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON PIN 783384 3: SHRI PRANDEEP DAS SO BHUBAN DAS RO RANI ABHAYESWARI PATH WARD NO 11 ABHAYAPURI PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON PIN 78338 VERSUS RUMI BANIK AND ANR WO SANKAR BANIK, DO LATE RABINDRA DEY, RO SWARUPANANDA ROAD, GOBINDAPOLLY, HOJAI, WARD NO 6, PO AND PS AND DIST HOJAI, ASSAM, 782435 2:PHUKAN ADHIKARY SO LATE ARABINDA ADHIKARY RO VILL BATABARI WARD NO 11 Page No.# 2/4 PO AND PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS A SAIKIA, Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B J MUKHERJEE, Linked Case : RSA/236/2024 NIVA BANIKYA AND 2 ORS W/O LATE BHUBAN DAS RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 11 BATABARI ABHAYAPURI TOWN PO AND PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783384 2: SRI PRANDEEP DAS S/O LATE BHUBAN DAS RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 11 BATABARI ABHAYAPURI TOWN PO AND PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783384 3: SRI MANDEEP DAS S/O LATE BHUBAN DAS RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 11 BATABARI ABHAYAPURI TOWN PO AND PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783384 VERSUS RUMI BANIK AND ANR D/O LATE JITENDRA BANIKYA Page No.# 3/4 W/O SANKAR BANIK RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HOJAI PO AND PS HOJAI DIST NAGAON ASSAM 782435 2:SRI PHUKAN ADHIKARY S/O LATE ARABINDA ADHIKARY RESIDENT OF BATABARI PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783384 ------------ Advocate for : MR JITENDRA DAS Advocate for : MS R SAHA appearing for RUMI BANIK AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 07.09.2026 1. Heard Ms. A Saikia, the learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. BJ Mukherjee, the learned counsel for all the respondents. 2. This application has been filed by the applicants/ appellants in connection with RSA No. 236/2024, whereby the prayer has been made to formulate two more substantial questions of law in addition to the two substantial questions of law, which have already been formulated in the connected RSA. 3. Since the respondents may argue during the hearing of the appeal that Page No.# 4/4 the substantial question of law suggested by the applicants/ appellants is not involved in the connected RSA, hence, this court is of the considered opinion that even if the aforesaid substantial questions of law are formulated, the respondents would not be prejudiced. As such, the following additional substantial questions of law are formulated in the connected RSA. “Substantial question No. 3: Whether the trial court and the First Appellate Court committed perversity in wrongly appreciating Ext. D,E,F and G in arriving at decision regarding title of the appellants/ original defendants in the title suit in respect of the land and house in which they reside. Substantial question No. 4: Whether the trial court as well as the First Appellate court committed perversity in shifting the burden of proof of ownership of the disputed land on the original defendants/ the appellants.” 4. The instant IA is accordingly disposed of. 5. Let the RSA No. 236/2024 be listed on 06.10.2026. JUDGE Comparing Assistant