Gauhati High Court
Shri Hementa Deori vs Dr Paramananda Deori And Anr on 15 May, 2019
Author: Prasanta Kumar Deka
Bench: Prasanta Kumar Deka
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010103942019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil) 1635/2019
1:SHRI HEMENTA DEORI
S/O LATE NILAMBAR DEORI, R/O VILL. SISSIMUKH DEORI GAON, P.O.
AND P.S. DHEMAJI, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN
VERSUS
1:DR PARAMANANDA DEORI and ANR
S/O LATE MIKILAI DEORI, R/O VILL. NALANIPAM, SURAJ NAGAR, P.O.
AND P.S. DHEMAJI, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN
2:SMTI TILUTTAMA DEORI
W/O DR. PARAMANANDA DEORI
R/O VILL. NALANIPAM
SURAJ NAGAR
P.O. AND P.S. DHEMAJI
DIST. DHEMAJI
ASSAM
PI
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A KHANIKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B DEORI
Linked Case : RSA 230/2016
1:SHRI HEMENTA DEORI
S/O LATE NILAMBAR DEORI
VILL. SISSIMUKH DEORI GAON
P.O. and P.S. DHEMAJI
DIST. DHEMAJI
Page No.# 2/3
VERSUS
1:DR PARAMANANDA DEORI and ANR
S/O LATE MIKILAI DEORI
VILL. NALANIPAM SUREUJ NAGAR
P.O. and P.S. DHEMAJI
DIST. DHEMAJI
2:SMT. TILUTTAMA DEORI
W/O DR. PARAMANANDA DEORI
R/O NALNIPAM SURUJ NAGAR
P.O.
P.S. and DIST. DHEMAJI.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B K GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR.P K DAS
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
ORDER
Date : 15-05-2019 Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. B. Deuri, the learned counsel for the opposite parties.
The present petitioner is the tenant judgment debtor in an ejectment decree in favour of the respondents decree holder vide order dated 28.08.2018 passed in RSA No. 230/2016. The present petitioner made an undertaking to vacate the suit premises within 8(eight) months. The said period ended on 31.03.2019. Upon such expiry of the said period, the present judgment debtor is before this Court for further extension of the said period of 8(eight) months by another 45 days. In order to vacate the premises it was observed in the said order dated 28.08.2018 that the respondents shall be at liberty to execute the decree of ejectment on completion of the 8(eight) months periods ending on 31.03.2019.
I have heard both the learned counsel.
From the contention of the parties, I do not find any merit for further extension of the said 8(eight) months period keeping in view of the past 8(eight) months were sufficient in order to shift Page No.# 3/3 the garage from the suit premises.
Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.
The respondents shall go ahead with the execution proceeding.
The petition is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant