GAHC010029352026 2026:GAU-AS:2208 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : CRP(IO)/41/2026 AKBAR ALI AND 2 ORS.

S/O LT. SUKUR ALI, VILL- GOLAPARA PART-III, P.O.- GOLAPARA, P.S.-

ABHAYAPURI, DIST- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM

2: ABDUL MANNAN S/O LATE SUKUR ALI R/O ABHAYPURI TOWN WARD NO. 11 P.O. AND P.S.- ABHAYAPURI DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSAM

3: SHOUKAT ALI AHMED S/O LATE SUKUR ALI R/O ABHAYPURI TOWN WARD NO. 11 P.O. AND P.S.- ABHAYAPURI DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSA VERSUS SULTAN MAHMUD AND ANR S/O LT. CHAND MAHMUD, VILL- BHARAL KUNDI, P.O.- ASHOK PAPER MILL, P.S.- JOGIGHOPA, DIST- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM

2:MONSER ALI AHMED S/O LT. SUKUR ALI R/O ABHAYPURI TOWN (NAYAPARA)

WARD NO. IV P.O. AND P.S.- ABHAYAPURI DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A T SARKAR, S R DAS Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER

16.02.2026 Heard Mr. A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 115 of the Code of the Civil Procedure, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 13.11.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bongaigaon (Trial Court, for short), in Misc.(J) Case No.78/2025, arising out of Title Suit No.152/2025. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 13.11.2025, the learned Trial Court has rejected the petition filed by the petitioners under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. Mr. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present petitioners, namely, Akbar Ali, Abdul Mannan and Shoukat Ali Ahmed and the proforma respondent No.2, namely, Monser Ali Ahmed are all siblings and are the sons of late Sukur Ali, who is the owner of a plot of land measuring 2 katha 10 lecha, covered by Patta No.5, Dag No.22, situated at village Korea Pahar, under Baithamari Revenue Circle, in the district of Bongaigaon, and that the proforma respondent No.2, namely, Monser Ali Ahmed has sold a plot of land, measuring 2 katha 10 lecha, covered by Patta No.5, Dag No.22, situated at village Korea Pahar, under Baithamari Revenue Circle, in the district of Bongaigaon to the respondent No.1 Md. Sultan Mahmud. Thereafter, Sultan Mahmud, the respondent No.1 has instituted one title suit, being Title Suit No.152/2025, which is now pending before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bongaigaon for specific performance of the contract, with a decree for direction to execute a registered sale deed in favour of him in respect of the said plot of land. Mr. Sarkar further submits that as soon as the petitioners came to know about the same, they have filed one impleadment application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 27.05.2025, upon which the learned Trial Court has registered the Misc.(J) Case No.78/2025 and thereafter, hearing both the parties, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the same, vide impugned order, dated 13.11.2025.

3.1 Mr. Sarkar further submits that the proforma respondent No.2 has sold the land to the respondent No.1 by fraudulently executing one gift deed allegedly executed by their father and also by forging his signature, without the knowledge of the petitioners, though they have equal right over the same like the proforma respondent No.2. Mr. Sarkar also submits that the petitioners have also filed one civil suit before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), North Salmara, Abhayapur, being Title Suit No.111/2025, challenging the said gift deed and the same is pending for disposal. Mr. Sarkar further submits that vide impugned order, dated 13.11.2025, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioners by observing that in a suit for specific performance of the contract, the plaintiff and the defendant are the necessary parties and a person claiming an independent title or hostile interest in the suit property is not a necessary party to a su