Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010134362024 2025:GAU-AS:2360 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/262/2024 SARAT CHANDRA DAS S/O- LATE BANESWAR DAS, R/O- VILL.- NAKUL-1, P.S. RANGIA, PIN- 781354, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS MUNINDRA NATH SARMA S/O- LATE KHAGENDRA NATH SARMA, R/O- HOUSE NO. 6, NEELAM PATH, HATIGARH CHARIALI, NEAR HATIGARH INDDOR STADIUM, GEETANAGAR, GHY-24, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM For the petitioner (s) : Mr. B. Borah, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Mr. R. Sarma, Advocate BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 05.03.2025 Heard Mr. B. Borah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. R. Sarma, the learned counsel Page No.# 2/4 appears on behalf of the respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 12.02.2024 passed in Land Grabbing Case No.2/2022 by the Court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rangia, Kamrup, Assam whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the Code’) for rejecting the application filed under Section 8(2) of the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010 (for short, ‘the Act of 2010’) was rejected. 3. This Court has duly perused the application so filed by the petitioner before the learned Court of the Additional District Judge, Kamrup, Rangia as well as the application so filed under Section 8 (2) of the Act of 2010 and the impugned order dated 12.02.2024. From a perusal of the application, it is seen that the petitioner herein had taken two grounds. First, that the application filed under Section 8(2) of the Act of 2010 was not filed in duplicate. The second ground is that there is no cause of action for filing the application under Section 8 (2) of the Act of 2010. 4. This Court duly takes note of the provisions of Section 9 of the Act of 2010 wherein it stipulates that the provisions of the Page No.# 3/4 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 shall apply in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of the said Act of 2010. It is further relevant to take note of that Rules are framed under the said Act of 2010 and wherein the manner in which an application is required to be filed under the said Act of 2010 had been stipulated. The Rules do not specify that there is a requirement of filing the application under Section 8 of the Act of 2010 in duplicate. 5. Considering the above, this Court does not find that it to be a ground for which the application filed by the respondent herein ought to be rejected. In addition to that, it is also relevant to take note of that it is a well settled principle of law that the provisions of Order VII Rule 11(e) of the Code cannot be applied straight away and the plaint can only be rejected after giving due opportunity. Considering the above, the first ground on which the petitioner herein has sought for rejection of the plaint has been rightly decided by the learned Court below. 6. The second ground so taken is that the respondent herein has no cause of action for filing the said application under Section 8 of the Act of 2010. The question as to whether the respondent herein has a cause of action or not is a subject matter of trial which can only be decided after evidence is adduced. The learned Court below has rightly therefore decided Page No.# 4/4 the second ground. This Court further finds it relevant to observe that a perusal of the application filed by the respondent herein do disclose a cause of action against the petitioner and as that is the requirement in terms with Order VII Rule 11 (a) of the Code, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rangia, Kamrup was justified in rejecting the application under Order Vii Rule 11 of the Code. 7. Considering the above, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the order dated 12.02.2024 passed in Land Grabbing Case No.2/2022 by the Court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rangia, Kamrup, Assam. 8. Accordingly the instant petition stands dismissed. 9. The interim order passed by this Court on 31.07.2024 by which the Land Grabbing Case No.2/2022 pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rangia, Kamrup was stayed is hereby vacated and the parties herein who are duly represented are directed to appear before the Court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rangia, Kamrup on 01.04.2025 for further proceedings of the said case. JUDGE Comparing Assistant