Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010237292024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/459/2024 DIPIKA BORDOLOI AND ANR W/O BIRINCHI KUMAR HAZARIKA R/O FLAT NO 2C VINAYAK APARTMENT FARM GATE KHANAPARA GUWAHATI DIST KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 2: BANDINI BORDOLOI W/O LUIT NARAYAN KONWAR R/O 706 CHRYSTER AVENUE NEW YORK DALAWAR 19711 USA REP BY HER ATTORNEY HOLDER NAMELY DIPIKA BORDOLOI VIDE REGISTERED GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY BEING DEED NO 7231/200 VERSUS GAUTAM KUMAR BORDOLOI AND 4 ORS S/O OF LT SARADA KANTA BORDOLOI R/O HOUSE NO 175 KAMALA KANTA ENCLAVE JAYA NAGAR OPP BHARAT PETROLEUM SIXMILE GUWAHATI DIST KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN 781022 4:ANUKUL BORDOLOI S/O LT SARADA KANTA BORDOLOI R/O HOUSE NO 30 BYE LANE 3 HENGRABARI GUWAHATI DIST KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN 781036 5:ANGSHUMAN BORDOLOI S/O LT SWARNAJYOTI BORDOLOI R/O VILL BAGARIGURI P.O BAGARIGURI DIST NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782103 6:AMLAN BORDOLOI S/O LT SWARNAJYOTI BORDOLOI R/O VILL BAGARIGURI P.O BAGARIGURI DIST NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782103 7:GARIMA BORDOLOI W/O LT ROHINI KUMAR BORDOLOI R/O HOUSE NO 26 BYE LANE 1 OPP SIVA MANDIR MALI BAGAN KHARGHULI GUWAHATI DIST KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN 78100 Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHOUDHURY, MR. SAILENDRA DEKA,MR. R K SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : R C SANCHATI (R1, R5, R7), MR. A SANCHETI (R1, R5, R7),MR S SANCHETI (R1, R5, R7) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 21.04.2026 Heard Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.C. Sancheti, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 27.02.2018, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 3, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati (trial court hereinafter), in Title Suit No. 128/2010. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 27.02.2018, the learned trial court had dismissed the petition No. 747/2018, filed by the petitioners herein by holding that last chance was given to the petitioners to give her specimen signatures in Assamese language with her disputed signature in Assamese language so as to send the same to FSL for examination and opinion thereon by an expert. 3.1. It is also to be noted here that the petition No. 747/2018 was filed by the engaged counsel for the petitioners by stating that the petitioners are trying to avoid appearance before the court. Thereafter, considering the fact that the case is an old pending one and already sufficient time has been elapsed, the learned trial court had drawn adverse presumption under Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act against the petitioners. 4. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that when the orders, Page No.# 3/4 dated 06.02.2018 and 27.02.2018, were passed, the petitioner No. 1 was at London with her family members and she had not been informed by her engaged counsel about the aforementioned orders being passed by the learned trial court. Mr. Deka further submits that having aware of the aforesaid orders, she had filed one petition, being Petition No. 1603/2018, on 27.04.2018, for recalling the impugned order dated 27.02.2018 and also for granting her opportunity to abide with the directions and instructions passed by the learned trial court. Under such circumstances, Mr. Deka submits that this matter may be disposed of by directing the learned trial court to dispose of the Petition No. 1603/2018, filed on 27.04.2018. 5. Per-contra, Mr. Sancheti, learned counsel for the respondents, has pointed it out that the petitioners are violating the process. Mr. Sancheti further submits that the Petition No. 1603/2018 has not been pursued by the petitioners, instead they have filed some other petitions before the learned trial court, being Petition Nos. 2098/2018 and 2099/2018. Mr. Sancheti also submits that because of the fault of the petitioners, the title suit is pending since the year 2010 and under such circumstances, he has contended to dismiss this petition. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also gone through the orders dated 18.01.2018, 06.02.2018 and 27.02.2018. 7. It appears that while the impugned order, dated 27.02.2018, was passed, the petitioner No. 1 was at London with her family members and on returning to India, she came to know about the orders being passed by the learned trial court and thereafter, she had filed one petition, being Petition No. 1603/2018, on 27.04.2018, for recalling the impugned order dated 27.02.2018 and also for granting her an opportunity to abide with the directions and instructions passed earlier by the Page No.# 4/4 learned trial court. 8. Under the given facts and circumstances on the record, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the learned trial court to dispose of the petition, No. 1603/2018, filed by the petitioners herein by giving an opportunity of being heard to both the parties and further considering the fact that at the time of passing of the impugned order, dated 27.02.2018, the petitioner No. 1 was at London with her family members. 9. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned trial court on 06.05.2026. 10. In terms of above, this petition stands disposed of. 11. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant