Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010122152026 2026:GAU-AS:8915 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/253/2026 SMTI GUMI LAKRA @ SHUNI LAKRA AND 5 ORS. W/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA, R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL, P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON, DIST.- KOKRAJHAR, BTR, ASSAM 2: SMTI SHANTINA LAKRA W/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSAM 3: SHUSMA LAKRA S/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSAM 4: SUJIT LAKRA S/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSAM 5: MANJOLI LAKRA S/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTR Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM 6: KESHAR LAKRA @ KISHORE LAKRA S/O LATE PRAKASH LAKRA R/O VILLAGE- PADMABIL P.O. AND P.S.- GOSSAIGAON DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSA VERSUS ASIR UDDIN MIAH S/O LATE AINUDDIN MIAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PANBARI PART-VIII, P.O.- ALOMGANJ, P.S.- GAURIPUR, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH, MS. P BORAH,MR. B HALDAR Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 19.06.2026 [1] Heard Mr. B. Haldar, the learned counsel for the petitioners. [2] This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners, impugning the order dated 27.05.2026, passed by the court of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Kokrajhar in Title Execution Case No. 01/2026, whereby, the executing court has directed issuance of writ for issuance of the decree obtained by the respondents side in Title Suit No. 05/2021. Page No.# 3/5 [3] The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted after passing of decree against the present petitioners in Title Suit No. 05/2021, the present petitioners engaged a counsel, namely, Mr. A. Mahmud, to prefer an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2025, passed in Title Suit No. 05/2021, however, the said engaged counsel did not file any appeal and rather he appeared before the executing court and submitted that the present petitioners are ready to vacate the suit land. Thereafter, after coming to know about the file of the execution case the present petitioners engaged a different set of counsels and to prefer an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2026. However, in doing so delay has been caused and, therefore, along with the appeal an application for condonation of delay has also been filed by the present petitioners. In the said application notices have been issued and the next date is fixed on 29.06.2026 for hearing on application for condonation of the delay filed by the present petitioners before the appellate court. [4] The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the hearing on the application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal before the first appellate court is fixed on 29.06.2026, however, the executing court has fixed the execution case for submission of report of execution on 25.06.2026 and as Page No.# 4/5 such, he apprehends that even before the application for condonation of delay is decided by the appellate court, the decree may be executed and the petitioners may be dispossessed from the decreetal land and, therefore, some protection is prayed for. [5] On perusal of the averments made in this revision petition as well as other documents annexed therewith and also after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it appears that an appeal has already been preferred against the decree which is sought to be executed in Title Execution Case No. 01/2026. However, since there has been some delay in filing the appeal, the petitioners have also filed an application for condonation of delay and which is pending before the appellate court. [6] Under such circumstances, the petitioners could have approached the appellate court itself under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking remedy of the stay of execution of the impugned decree during the pendency of the condonation of delay application. As such this revision petition is disposed of with an observation that the petitioners may approach the appellate court for seeking appropriate relief for stay of execution of the decree which is sought to be executed in the Title Execution Case No. 01/2026 during the pendency of the decision on application for Page No.# 5/5 condonation of delay filed by the present petitioners. To facilitate the petitioners in approaching for appropriate remedy before the appellate court, for next 7(seven) days, the proceedings of Title Execution Case No. 01/2026 shall remain stayed. [7] With these observations, this CRP (IO) is hereby disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant