Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010098482024 2025:GAU-AS:11347 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/167/2024 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. (A CENTRAL GOVT. UNDERTAKING) HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI, G.S. ROAD, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI- 781007 REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER, GAUHATI REGIONAL OFFICE, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI- 781005. VERSUS OIL INDIA LIMITED AND 3 ORS A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISE, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, DULIAJAN, P.O.- DULIAJAN, DISTRICT- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN- 786602. 2:NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING DIVISIONAL OFFICE GINORIA MANSION CHIRWA PATTY A.T. ROAD TINSUKIA TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- TINSUKIA DISTRICT- TINSUKIA ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 PIN- 786125. 3:NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING DIVISIONAL OFFICE RONGAGORA ROAD TINSUKIA TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- TINSUKIA DISTRICT- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125. 4:UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING DIVISIONAL OFFICE RONGAGORA ROAD TINSUKIA TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- TINSUKIA DISTRICT- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS R D MAZUMDAR, MS. C MOZUMDAR,MR. S P SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : MR A SARMA (R-1), MS. P BORTHAKUR(R-3),MR. R GOSWAMI(R-3) Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 26.08.2025 1. Heard Ms. R. D. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner/ Oriental Insurance Company. Also heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the New India Insurance Company and Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the Oil India Limited. 2. The respondents/ National Insurance Company Limited and United India Insurance Company Limited are absent on call, in spite of service of notice upon them. 3. This application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Challenging the order dated 25.04.2024, passed in Misc. (J) Case No.101/2024, arising out of Commercial Suit No.01/2023, pending in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dibrugarh, allowing the proforma defendant/ National Insurance Company Limited to be transposed as plaintiff No.2 in the said Suit. 4. I have gone through the impugned order. 5. At this stage, Order 23 Rule 1A of the Code of Civil Procedure is relevant it reads as, where a Suit is withdrawn or abandoned by a plaintiff under Rule 1, and a defendant tries to be transposed as plaintiff under rule 10 of Order 1, the Court shall in considering such application, have due regard to the question whether the applicant has a substantial question to be decided as against any of the other defendants. 6. In the case in hand, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has not withdrawn or abandoned the Suit. Naturally, the National Insurance Company Ltd. being the defendant in the Suit is not supposed to seek transposition as plaintiff No.2 of the Page No.# 4/4 Suit. 7. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law and stands set aside. 8. The Trial Court shall dispose of the said Commercial Suit in accordance with the procedure as laid down by law. 9. With the aforesaid direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant