Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010152042023 2025:GAU-AS:1666 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/226/2023 ADALAT MIA S/O LATE HABIBAR RAHMAN, R/O VILL- BANIARPARA, P.O.-JANIA, MOUZA-GHILAZARI, P.S. AND DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS TAIZUDDIN AHMED S/O ABDUS SALAM, R/O VILL- DANGARKUCHI, P.O.-SONKUCHI, MOUZA- GHILAZARI, P.S. AND DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781316 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. KU Ahmed Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr.TR Sen B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 17.02.2025 Page No.# 2/3 Heard Mr. KU Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. TR Sen, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 08.06.2023 passed in Misc. Appeal Case No.1/2023, whereby the appeal filed challenging the order of rejection of the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, the Code) was dismissed. It is relevant to take note of that the petitioner herein, who is the defendant in Title Suit No.10/2017 duly received the summons in connection with Title Suit No.10/2017 as admitted in the application filed under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner herein appeared before the learned Trial Court on 10.03.2017 and sought for time to file the written statement with a prayer to furnish the relevant documents. 3. The learned Trial Court thereupon fixed the matter on 27.04.2017 for SR and WS. The petitioner herein states in his application that he came to the Court to appear on 27.04.2017, however, the Presiding Officer of the learned Trial Court was absent. 4. It is the further case of the petitioner that he met the counsel, who had assured him that he would conduct the said suit and take necessary steps. The petitioner thereupon went back and after 05.07.2017, till he received the notice on 11.11.2021 in Title Execution Case No.02/2021, the petitioner did not take any steps in the said suit or met his counsel. This Court had duly taken note of the order passed by the learned Trial Court dated 14.12.2022 in the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code which was registered as Misc.(J) Case No.84/2022 as well as the order being passed by the learned First Appellate Court in Misc. Appeal Case No.1/2023, which is the impugned order in the instant proceedings. It is the opinion of this Court that both the learned Trial Page No.# 3/3 Court while adjudicating the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code as well as the learned First Appellate Court in exercise of its powers had duly taken note of the relevant considerations. 5. This Court does not find any error in jurisdiction in the order passed by the learned First Appellate Court i.e. the order dated 08.06.2023 passed in Misc. Appeal Case No.1/2023 to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. It is under such circumstances, the instant petition stands dismissed. 6. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant