Gauhati High Court
CRP(IO)/225/2026 of AJIT SANGA AND 2 ORS. Vs BAHADUR MURA on 29 September 2026
GAHC010113412026 2026:GAU-AS:14556 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/225/2026 AJIT SANGA AND 2 ORS. S/O LATE SUMEL MURA, R/O 2 NO. SORUPATHAR GAON (USHAPUR), P.S.- MORANHAT, DIST- CHARAIDEO 2: SOJIT SANGA S/O LATE SUMEL MURA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
GAHC010113412026
2026:GAU-AS:14556
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/225/2026 AJIT SANGA AND 2 ORS. S/O LATE SUMEL MURA, R/O 2 NO. SORUPATHAR GAON (USHAPUR), P.S.- MORANHAT, DIST- CHARAIDEO 2: SOJIT SANGA S/O LATE SUMEL MURA R/O 2 NO. SORUPATHAR GAON (USHAPUR) P.S.- MORANHAT DIST- CHARAIDEO 3: ABHIJIT SANGA S/O LATE SUMEL MURA R/O 2 NO. SORUPATHAR GAON (USHAPUR) P.S.- MORANHAT DIST- CHARAIDE VERSUS BAHADUR MURA S/O LATE MONGRA MURA, R/O 2 NO. SORUPATHAR GAON (USHAPUR), P.S.- MORANHAT, DIST- CHARAIDEO, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H P GUWALA, S FAZIL,MR. A BORO Advocate for the Respondent : MR. T K BHUYAN, MR S DAS,MR G J SAIKIA
:: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
O R D E R
30.09.2026
Heard Mr. H.P. Guwala, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. G.J. Saikia, the learned counsel representing the respondent.
2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 14.05.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Charaideo, Sonari in Title Appeal No.08/2024.
3. The petitioners are the appellant before the trial court. They filed a petition under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) praying for adducing additional evidence. That petition was rejected by the appellate court. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioners have come to this Court and filed the present petition.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.
5. It is a settled position of law that a petition under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC filed before an appellate court should be disposed of at the time of final hearing of the appeal. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside.
6. The learned appellate court is directed to consider the prayer of the petitioners at the time of final hearing of the appeal. With the aforesaid direction, the revision petition is disposed of.
The interim order passed earlier also stands vacated.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant