Gauhati High Court
Ibrahim Ali Laskar And Ors vs Abdul Haque Barbhuiya And Ors on 6 May, 2026
Page No.# 1/13
GAHC010082612026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1399/2026
IBRAHIM ALI LASKAR AND ORS
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA, R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II, P.O.
CHIPARSANGAN, P.S. ALGAPUR, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
2: ISHAQUE ALI LASKAR @ ICHAK ALI LASKAR
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPARSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
3: ISUB ALI LASKAR @ YUCHUB ALI LASKAR
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPARSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4: NURJAN BIBI
W/O- ABDUL MAJID LASKAR
R/O- BAKRIHAWAR PART-III
P.O. KALINAGAR
P.S. PANCHGRAM
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5: ON THE DEATH OF SHONGU BIBI
HER LEGAL HEIRS
5.1: ABDUL GAFUR
S/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
Page No.# 2/13
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.2: LAILA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.3: HUSNA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.4: MONOWARA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
6: FATHIMA BIBI
D/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPASANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSA
VERSUS
ABDUL HAQUE BARBHUIYA AND ORS
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI, R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II, P.S. ALGAPUR, DIST.-
HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
2:ABDUL REJAK BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
3:ABDUL MOTIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
Page No.# 3/13
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4:BAHAR UDDIN BARBHUIYA @ YASIN ALI
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5:ABU KASHIM BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
6:SAMSUL HAQUE BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
7:FAKAR UDDIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
8:BIBI AYESHA
W/O- HAZI TAYUB ALI
R/O- BAKRIHAWAR PART-VI
P.S. PANCHGRAM
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
PIN- 788802.
9:ABDUL HASIB LASKAR
SECRETARY
JUKURGRAM MASJID
R/O- VILL.- CHIPORSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPORSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
Page No.# 4/13
PIN- 788801
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N HAQUE, MR. A K AZAD,MR H I CHOUDHURY,MR. S R
BARBHUIYA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN, MR. M H SAIKIA (R-1 TO 9),MR. N
I MAZARBHUYAN (R-1 TO 9)
Linked Case : RSA/105/2021
IBRAHIM ALI LASKAR AND 5 ORS.
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPARSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
2: ISHAQUE ALI LASKAR @ ICHAK ALI LASKAR
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPARSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
3: ISUB ALI LASKAR @ YUCHUB ALI LASKAR
S/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPARSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4: NURJAN BIBI
W/O- ABDUL MAJID LASKAR
R/O- BAKRIHAWAR PART-III
P.O. KALINAGAR
P.S. PANCHGRAM
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5: ON THE DEATH OF SHONGU BIBI
Page No.# 5/13
HER LEGAL HEIRS
5.1: ABDUL GAFUR
S/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.2: LAILA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.3: HUSNA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5.4: MONOWARA BEGUM BARBHUIYA
D/O- LATE NIMAR ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
6: FATHIMA BIBI
D/O- LATE HAJI KALA MIA
R/O- CHIPARSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPASANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
VERSUS
ABDUL HOQUE BARBHUIYA AND 8 ORS.
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
2:ABDUL REJAK BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
Page No.# 6/13
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
3:ABDUL MOTIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4:BAHAR UDDIN BARBHUIYA @ YASIN ALI
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
5:ABU KASHIM BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
6:SAMSUL HAQUE BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
7:FAKAR UDDIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- LATE MAYUB ALI
R/O- CHANDIPUR PART-II
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
8:BIBI AYESHA
W/O- HAZI TAYUB ALI
R/O- BAKRIHAWAR PART-VI
P.S. PANCHGRAM
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
PIN- 788802.
9:ABDUL HASIB LASKAR
Page No.# 7/13
SECRETARY
JUKURGRAM MASJID
R/O- VILL.- CHIPORSANGAN PART-II
P.O. CHIPORSANGAN
P.S. ALGAPUR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788801.
------------
Advocate for : MR. N HAQUE
Advocate for : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN (R-1 TO 9) appearing for ABDUL
HOQUE BARBHUIYA AND 8 ORS.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
Date : 06.05.2026
Heard Mr. N. Hoque, learned counsel appearing for the
applicants. Aslo heard Mr. I. S. Mazarbhuiyan, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of Mr. N. H. Mazarbhuiyan, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 9.
2. By way of this application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908, the applicants seek a decree on compromise
based on a lawful agreement in writing signed by the parties in respect
of the subject matter of the suit arising out of RSA No. 105/2021.
3. The applicants, as plaintiffs, had instituted Title Suit No. 26/2013
before the Court of the learned Munsiff, Hailakandi, seeking, inter alia, a
declaration that they are the sole legal heirs of late Kala Mia in respect
of the suit pattas; that Arabjan Bibi is not a shareholder of the suit
pattas as she is not a legal heir of late Kala Mia; that the mutation
granted in favour of Mayab Ali in place of Arabjan Bibi is illegal; and that
Page No.# 8/13
the Wakf Nama dated 02.01.1991 is void.
4. The said suit came to be dismissed by the judgment and decree
dated 13.03.2019 passed by the learned trial court. Upon appeal being
preferred, the appellate court, by judgment and decree dated
30.03.2021, affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned
trial court. Aggrieved thereby, the applicants preferred the connected
Regular Second Appeal before this Court, which was admitted on the
following substantial questions of law:
“(a) Whether the learned Courts below erred in law in passing
the impugned judgment and decree declaring title of the
predecessor of the defendants and the defendants on the basis
of inheritance, without there being any evidence on record to
establish that the defendants or their predecessor had acquired
right, title and interest over the suit pattas in accordance with
Sections 8, 9, 11 and 15 of the Assam Land and Revenue
Regulation, 1886?
(b) Whether the learned Courts below erred in law in
dismissing the plaintiffs’ suit solely on the basis of mutation
entries, i.e. Exhibits 1 to 10, without any evidence showing
that the predecessor of the defendants inherited the land
covered by the suit pattas from the original pattadar, and
without considering the settled proposition that mere mutation
entries in revenue records do not confer title?
(c) Whether the learned Courts below were justified in deciding
Issue No. 3 relating to burden of proof without properly
Page No.# 9/13applying Sections 103 and 106 of the Indian Evidence Act?”
5. It is the specific case of the applicants that during the pendency of
the Regular Second Appeal, the applicants and the opposite
parties/respondents entered into a written compromise agreement in
respect of the suit land and amicably settled the dispute on the terms
and conditions embodied in the compromise deed. The relevant portions
of the compromise deed are reproduced hereinbelow:
“DEED OF COMPROMISE
This DEED OF COMPROMISE is made on this 16th day of April, 2026
at Hallakandi.
BETWEEN
(1) Ibrahim All Laskar, age 78 years, (2) Ishaque All Laskar, age 72
years, Sons of Late Haji Kala Mia, Residents of Village:
Chiporsangan Part-II, P.O: Chiporsangan, P.S: Algapur, District:
Hailakandi, Assam, (3) Nurjan Bibl, age 90 years, W/O Abdul Majid
Laskar, Resident of Village: Bakrihawar Part-ll, P.O: Kalinagar, P.S:
Panchgram, District: Hailakandi, Assam, (4) On the death of Shongu
Bibi W/O Late Nimar Ali, herlegal heirs; (1) Abdul Gafur Barbhulya,
age 52 years, (II) Laila Begum Barbhuiya, age 54 years, (III) Husna
Begum Barbhuiya, age 49 years, (iv) Monowara Begum Barbhuiya,
age 40 years, All are son and daughters of Late Nimar All, Residents
of Village: Chandipur Part-II, P.O: Kalibaribazar, P.S: Algapur,
District: Hailakandi, Assam (5) Fatima Bibi, age 60 years, D/O Late
Haji Kala Mia, Residents of Village: Chiporsangan Part-II, P.O.
Chiporsangan, P.S: Algapur, District: Hailakandi, Assam, hereinafter
called the 1st Partles.
-AND-
(1) Abdul Haque Barbhulya, age 90 years, (2) Abdul Rezak
Barbhulya, age 83 years, (3) Abdul Motin Barbhuiya, age 77 years,
(4) Bahar Uddin Barbhulya@Yasin Ali, age 65 years, (5) Abdul
Kashim Barbhuiya, age 60 years, (6) Samsul Haque Barbhulya, age
57 years, (7) Fakar Uddin Barbhulya, age 50 years, All are sons of
Late Mayub Ali, Residents of Village: Chandipur Part-II, P.O:
Kallbaribazar, P.S: Algapur, District: Hailakandi, Assam, (8) Bibi
Page No.# 10/13Ayesha, age 86 years, W/O Hazi Tayub Ali, Resident of Village:
Bakrihawar Part-VI, P.O: Kalinagar, P.S: Panchgram, District:
Hailakandi, Assam, (9) Abdul Hasib Laskar, age 40 years, Secretary
Tukargram Masjid, Residents of Village: Chiporsangan Part-II, P.O:
Chiporsangan, P.S: Algapur, District: Hailakandi, Assam 2nd Parties.
WHEREAS the 1st parties as plaintiffs had filed a suit being T.S
No.26/2013 in the Court of Munsiff No.1, Hailakandi praying a
decree to declare that they are the only legal heirs of late Haji Kala
Mia and for a decree to declare that Arabjan Bibl did not Inherit any
property with legal heirs of late Haji Kala Mia who was the pattadar
of 2nd R.S. Patta
No.159/158/151/155/147/77/128/150/160/134 under Porgona-
Hallakandi, Mouza- Chiporsangan Pt-II in the district of Hallakandi
and for a declaration that the Deed of Wakfnama dated 02.01.1991
is vold.
AND WHEREAS, the T.S. No.26/2013 was dismissed by judgment &
decree dated 10.04.2019 passed by the Ld. Munsiff No.1,
Hallakandi and the sald judgment & decree dated 10.04.2019 was
affirmed by the Ld. Civil Judge, Hallakandi in T.A. No.8/2019 by
judgment & decree dated 30.03.2021.
AND WHEREAS, one Regular Second Appeal being R.S.A.
No.105/2021 was filed before the Hon’ble High Court against the
judgment & decree dated 30.03.2021 by the 1 Parties and the sald
Regular Second Appeal has been admitted by the Hon’ble High Court
by Order dated 01.11.2021.
AND WHEREAS, the partles hereln-above mutually compromise the
sult In connection with aforesald Regular Second Appeal as follows:
(1) The second partles have relinquished their claim over the land
covered by Patta No. 159/ 158/151/155/147/77/128/150/160
and 134 as described in Schedule-1 of the Plaint In T.S. No.26/2013
which was filed by the 1st Parties against the 2nd Partles in the
Court of Munsiff No.1, Hallakandi and for such relinquishment the
1st Parties have pald an amount of Rs.300000.00 (Rupees Three
Lakhs) only in favour of the 2nd Partles.
(2) The 2nd Parties will not have any right, title and interest over the
sald patta No. 159/ 158/151/155/147/77/128/150/160 and 134
as described in Schedule-1 of the Plaint in T.S. No.26/2013. The
names of the Second Parties will be deleted from the revenue record
in respect of said
Page No.# 11/13PattaNo.159/158/151/155/147/77/128/150/160 and 134. The
1st Parties will be only pattadars of the sald Patta No.
159/158/151/155/147/77/128/150/160 and 134 as described in
Schedule-1 of the Plaint In T.S. No.26/2013 and accordingly the
revenue record will be corrected.
(3) The DEED No.13 dated 01.01.1991 executed by the predecessor
of the 2nd Partles Mayub All In favour of the Secretary, Tukargram
Masjid as as described in Schedule-1 of the Plaint In T.S.
No.26/2013 will not have any affect so far the land measuring 6
Khatas (Out of 9 Khata 11 Chatak) covered by Dag No. 402, 506,
508, 511, 2nd R.S Patta No.147 of Porgona- Hallakandi, Mouza-
Chiporsangan Pt-II in the district of Hallakandi, Assam which is
bounded by-
NORTH: Ishaque All Laskar and Ibrahim All Laskar
SOUTH: Road
EAST: Road
WEST: Ibrahim Ali Laskar
(4) The 1st Partles will have right, title and Interest over the 6 Khatas
of land (out of 9 Khata 11 Chatak) covered by Dag No. 402, 506,
508, 511, 2nd R.S. Patta No.147 of Porgona-Hailakandi, Mouza-
Chiporsangan Pt-II in the district of Hallakandi, Assam which is
bounded by-
NORTH: Ishaque Ali Laskar and Ibrahim Ali Laskar
SOUTH: Road
EAST: Road
WEST: Ibrahim Ali Laskar
(5) The 1 Partles will mutate their names in revenue record in respect
of the above land measuring6 Khatas of land (out of 9 Khata 11
Chatak) and the remaining 3 Khata 11 Chatak will retain in the
name of 2nd Parties. The 2nd Parties will not have right, title and
Interest over the said 6 Khatas of land which is part of Schedule-11
of the Plaint In T.S. No.26/2013.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this DEED
OF COMPROMISE on the day, month and year first above written.”
Page No.# 12/13
6. Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC reads as follows:
“3. Compromise of suit.–Where it is proved to the satisfaction
of the Court that a suit has been adjusted wholly or in part by
any lawful agreement or compromise 1 [in writing and signed by
the parties] or where the defendant satisfied the plaintiff in
respect to the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the suit,
the Court shall order such agreement, compromise or satisfaction
to be recorded, and shall pass a decree in accordance therewith 2
[so far as it relates to the parties to the suit, whether or not the
subject matter of the agreement, compromise or satisfaction is the
same as the subject-matter of the suit:][Provided that where it is alleged by one party and denied by the
other that an adjustment or satisfaction has been arrived at, the
Court shall decide the question; but not adjournment shall be
granted for the purpose of deciding the question, unless the Court,
for reasons to be recorded, thinks fit to grant such adjournment.]
7. A perusal of the compromise deed reveals that the parties have
amicably resolved their inter se disputes relating to the subject matter
of the suit and have consciously reduced the terms of settlement into
writing. The compromise deed forms part of the present interlocutory
application and bears the signatures/thumb impressions of the parties
as well as those of the attesting witnesses.
8. This Court has also perused the terms of settlement and finds the
same to be lawful, voluntary and not opposed to public policy. The
compromise pertains directly to the subject matter of the appeal and
effectively resolves the disputes between the parties in their entirety. No
legal impediment is, therefore, found in recording the same.
Page No.# 13/13
9. Accordingly, being satisfied that the compromise has been
voluntarily executed by the parties without any force, fraud or coercion,
this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present application in
exercise of powers under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC.
10. Consequently, the interlocutory application stands allowed and a
decree is passed in terms of the compromise deed.
11. Resultantly, the connected Regular Second Appeal stands disposed
of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
12. Let a decree be drawn up accordingly in accordance with law.
13. Send back the TCR forthwith.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
[ad_1]
Source link
