Gauhati High Court
Md Hedayat Ullah vs Abdul Rahman on 6 February, 2019
Author: Prasanta Kumar Deka
Bench: Prasanta Kumar Deka
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010018742019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : RFA 15/2019
1:MD HEDAYAT ULLAH
S/O LATE GIASUDDIN ,
R.O BENGANA ATI,
PS SADAR NAGAON, PO CHOTTAHAIBAR,
MOUZA NIZ SCHAR, DIST NAGAON, ASSAM, 782003
VERSUS
1:ABDUL RAHMAN
S/O LATE TURAB ALI,
R.O BENGANA ATI,
PS SADAR NAGAON, PO CHOTTAHAIBAR,
MOUZA NIZ SCHAR, DIST NAGAON, ASSAM, 782003
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SK N MOHAMMAD
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
ORDER
06.02.2019 Heard Mr. S.K.N. Mohammad, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. C. Borpatragohain, the learned Advocate General, Assam.
This appeal is filed impugning judgment dated 15.11.2018 and decree dated 22.11.2018 passed in Special (LG) Case No.19/2016 by the learned Special Tribunal, Nagaon.
Page No.# 2/2 This impugned decree arose out of a proceeding drawn under the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010. This appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for interference by this Court of the impugned judgment and decree. Whether this Court has the jurisdiction to admit the appeal like an appeal under Section 96 of the CPC which is a prescribed right to a person aggrieved is the issue before this Court keeping in view the provisions of the said Act of 2010 wherein Section 13 stipulates that any person aggrieved by the judgment and order not being an Interlocutory Application of the Special Tribunal may prefer an appeal before the Special Court and Section 14 prescribes the constitution of the Special Court. The Government as per Section 14 of the said Act, 2010 for the purpose of entertaining and disposal of appeals arising out of any judgment and order of the Special Tribunal by notification published in the Official Gazette constitute a Special Court for the whole of the State of Assam. This statue is a special statue and the statue provides the remedy by way of an appeal under such circumstances, invocation of the jurisdiction under Section 96 of the CPC would not be proper.
On a query to Mr. Mohammad, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Special Court is yet to be constituted by the Government. In order to get the first hand information with respect to the constitution of the said Special Court, the learned Advocate General is requested to appear and on his appearance he submits that necessary steps had already been initiated by the Government and the constitution of the Special Court is going to be completed within a very short period preferably within this month itself.
Keeping in view the ground reality and also in the interest of the present appellant it would be proper and appropriate to keep this appeal pending with an interim order restraining the learned Special Tribunal -cum- Additional District Judge, Nagaon not to go ahead with the execution part of the judgment and decree.
List this matter again on 06.03.2019 for order.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant