Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010199052010 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RSA/87/2010 SRI GANDHI SINHA S/O LATE DHANMONI SINHA, R/O VILL. PASCIM HARINAGAR, P.O. ANIPUR, P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI, DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM. VERSUS TOTA MIA and ORS 2:SIRAJ UDDIN BOTH SONS OF FAIAZ ALI R/O VILL. BEELBARI P.O. ANIPUR P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 3:GAUR KISHORE SINHA S/O SRI BABUDHAN SINHA @ BAPU SINHA R/O PASCHIM HARINAGAR P.O. ANIPUR P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 4:DHANANJOY SINHA S/O LATE DHANMONI SINHA R/O VILL. PASCHIM HARINAGAR Page No.# 2/3 P.O. ANIPUR P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 5:BABUDHAN SINHA @ BAPU SINHA S/O LATE DHANMONI SINHA R/O VILL. PASCHIM HARINAGAR P.O. ANIPUR P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM. 6:BABULOK SINHA S/O LATE DHANMONI SINHA VILL. PASCHIM HARINAGAR P.O. ANIPUR P.S. RAMKRISHNAGAR PREVIOUSLY RATABARI DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P SEN, MS.J PAUL,MISS.B SARKAR Advocate for the Respondent : MRH I CHOUDHURY, MR.S K DEORI,MR.N HAQUE,MRK UDDIN,DR.B AHMED,MR.S R BARBHUIYA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 23.07.2026 None appears for the appellant on call. However, Mr. K. Uddin, learned counsel for the respondents in present. It appears that this appeal was listed on 10.02.2026, on which, the appellant remained absent without steps. Thereafter, it was listed on 02.03.2026, and on that day also, the appellant remained absent without steps. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 29.04.2026 and even on that day, the Page No.# 3/3 appellant remained absent without steps and today also, the appellant remained absent without steps. The learned counsel for the respondent, referring to the order dated 29.04.2026, submits that an observation was made in the said order that in the event of subsequent non-representation of the appellant, appropriate order shall follow. Accordingly, the counsel for the respondent has contended to pass appropriate order. Since on 4 (four) subsequent dates, the appellant remained absent continuously without any steps, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss this appeal for non-prosecution. Accordingly, this RSA No. 87/2010, stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Registry shall return the record to the learned Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court forthwith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant