Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN
Radha Rani Das – Appellant
Versus
Ashish Mazumdar S/o Late Bhola Nath Mazumder – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of ownership dispute and prior suits. (Para 2) |
| 2. facts leading to the present appeal. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments from both parties regarding appeal. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's analysis of the case laws and proceedings. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. clarifications on findings and directions. (Para 11) |
| 6. final conclusion and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. O. Laskar, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This appeal, under Section 100 , read with Section 151 of the C.P.C., is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.12.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sribhumi (first appellate court), in Misc. Appeal No. 05/2021.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned Judgment and Order dated 09.12.2024, the learned first appellate court had upheld the impugned order, dated 26.08.2019, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Karimganj (executing court), in Title Execution Case No. 05/2015, whereby the learned executing court has rejected the application, dated 14.08.2019, filed by the appellants under Rule 97 & 101 of Order XXI of the C.P.C. in the said Title Exec
Ownership claims through tenancy do not equate to legal possession under the Civil Procedure Code, impacting the maintainability of applications for adjudication.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a decree obtained by a tenant against a licensee can be executable against subsequent purchasers who are in possession without any lawful decr....
The court established that a suit seeking similar relief to an ongoing execution proceeding under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC is not maintainable, emphasizing the exclusive jurisdiction of the executing cou....
Executing Court has authority to adjudicate all questions pertaining to right, title or interest in property arising between parties including claim of a stranger who apprehends dispossession from im....
In execution proceedings, an application under Order XXI Rule 58 is only valid when there is an attachment of property; objections must relate to claims within that context.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive nature of the determination between the parties and the decree-holder under Order XXI Rule 97 of CPC, and the application of this pr....
The executing court is competent to consider all questions raised by the persons offering obstruction against execution of the decree and pass appropriate order, which is to be treated as a decree. T....
(1) Though suit for eviction may not be maintainable against Thika Tenant, but suit against trespasser would not be barred under Thika Tenancy Act – In order to ascertain maintainability of suit Cour....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
