GAHC010000312026

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/15/2026

in

FAO/1/2026

RATHIN TALUKDAR

S/O CHANDRAKANTA TALUKDAR

R/O HOUSE NO. 5

MANIKANCHAN PATH

BELTOLA

GUWAHATI-781028 DIST- KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM VERSUS

JAYANTA SARMAH AND 6 ORS.

S/O LATE TRAILOKYA DEV SARMAH

R/O BISHNU RABHA PATH

KAMAR CHUBURI

TEZPUR

DIST- SONITPUR

ASSAM

2:MUKUT SARMA

S/O LATE TRAILOKYA DEV SARMAH

R/O BISHNU RABHA PATH

KAMAR CHUBURI

TEZPUR

DIST- SONITPUR

ASSAM

3:RUBIMONI SARMAH

DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE TRAILOKYA DEV SARMAH

R/O FLAT-5B

PURBASHA APARTMENT

SONI RAM BORA ROAD NEAR BORA SERVICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM.

4:RIJU DEVI DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE TROILOKYA DEV SARMAH R/O BISHNU RABHA PATH KAMAR CHUBURI TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM

5:JONALI DEVI D/O LATE TROILOKYA DEV SARMAH R/O SKUAST-J R.S. PURA RANBIR SINGH PORA JAMMU JAMMU AND KASHMIR PIN-181102

6:KAMAL DAS S/O JAGAT CHANDRA DAS R/O KRISHNA NAGAR BASISTHA GUWAHATI-781029 DIST- KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM

7:SHILPIRANI CHETIA PHUKAN W/O KAMAL DAS R/O KRISHNA NAGAR BASISTHA GUWAHATI-781029 DIST- KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM ------------

Advocate for : MR. R ALI Advocate for : appearing for JAYANTA SARMAH AND 6 ORS.

BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

ORDER

06-01-2026 Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant.

2. This interlocutory application has been filed under order XXXIX Rules, 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC praying for grant of ex-parte ad-interim temporary injunction, pending disposal of the connected appeal.

3. It is submitted by Mr. Ali, learned counsel that the present applicant as plaintiff had instituted a Title Suit being T.S. No.817/2025 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No.2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, wherein the appellant had sought for a decree of declaration that Registered Sale Deed bearing No. 20733 dated 30.09.2023 (Registered on 09.10.2023) is valid/subsisting and same is also binding upon the defendants, specially defendant Nos. 1 to 5 and defendant No.6 in respect of the suit land along with other relief including the declaration that the NOC/Sale permission dated 22.10.2025 obtained by the defendant/respondent Nos. 1 to 5 in favour of the defendant/respondent No.7 is invalid/illegal and violates the terms of the Deed of Agreement No. 20733 dated 30.09.2023. In the said suit, it is further prayed for execution of the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of half share of the plaintiff out of the suit land which is described in the plaint itself. Along with the said Title Suit, one misc case was also filed under order XXXIX Rules, 1 and 2 read with Sections 94 and 151 of the CPC seeking temporary injunction and ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 from selling/transferring/alienating suit land on the basis of the NOC/Sale permission dated 22.10.2025 in favour of the respondent No.7 or any 3^rd party pending disposal of the suit.

4. Further he submitted that the learned Trial Court below after hearing the arguments put forwarded by the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant passed the impugned order dated 22.12.2025 and rejected the prayer of ex parte ad interim temporary injunction with an observation that though the prima facie case is in favour of the present applicant/appellant, but declined to pass any order of ex parte ad interim temporary injunction without hearing the other side. It is also observed by the learned Addl. District Judge that the applicant/appellant failed to produce any document in support of his case.

5. He further submitted that in the said order though it has been discussed by the leaned Addl. District Judge that prima facie case lies in favour of the applicant, but failed to made any discussion in regard to the other two principles, i.e., irreparable loss and balance of convenience in the said order. The order has been passed very casually and without even discussing the three golden principles for granting injunction and hen