MOHAN CHANDRA DEKA vs RAJENDRA KUMAR DEKA Advocate - MR D DEKA, ,MD F FARIDI — FAO/11/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER XLII, RULE 1(R). Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: GAHC010025172026

e-Filing Number

08-02-2026

Filing Number

FAO/1388/2026

Filing Date

09-Feb-2026

Registration No

FAO/11/2026

Registration Date

18-Feb-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita

Coram

Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

10222 - Other appeals under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC in temporary ( 190 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Of

Last updated 01-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER XLII, RULE 1(R)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MOHAN CHANDRA DEKA

    Adv. MR. A K JAIN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAJENDRA KUMAR DEKA Advocate - MR D DEKA, ,MD F FARIDI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar KalitaView PDF

    The Gauhati High Court disposed of the appeal filed by Mohan Chandra Deka against the trial court's refusal to grant ex-parte interim injunction regarding construction on schedule-C land. Both parties agreed to maintain status quo on the disputed property during the pendency of the miscellaneous case before the trial court, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly with directions for expeditious disposal of the underlying matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Admission

    Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita

  4. 20-Feb-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Mridul Kumar KalitaView PDF

  5. 09-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. FAO/11/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Gauhati High Court disposed of the appeal filed by Mohan Chandra Deka against the trial court's refusal to grant ex-parte interim injunction regarding construction on schedule-C land. Both parties agreed to maintain status quo on the disputed property during the pendency of the miscellaneous case before the trial court, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly with directions for expeditious disposal of the underlying matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case