Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010208572025 2025:GAU-AS:13047 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : FAO/60/2025 NAFIA AFSIN W/O MD. ASHAN ALI, D/O INAMUL HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, PO AND PS MATHURAPUR, DIST CHARIADEO, ASSAM VERSUS MD ASHAN ALI S/O DIDAR ALI, RESIDENT OF NORTH AMULAPATTY, NEAR BOGA BABA MAJHAR, PO AND PS AND DIST DIBRUGARH, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H A AHMED, N PERVIN,MR. MUSTAFA HUSSAIN,MR. R ALI Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 19-09-2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. R. Ali for the appellant, who has preferred this appeal under Section 47(a) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 against the impugned judgment and order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Page No.# 2/3 Judge, Dibrugarh in Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022, appointing the respondent as guardian of the minor son of the appellant and the respondent. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that an ex-parte order was passed in Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022, despite the fact that this Court had stayed the proceeding of Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022. 3. The order of this Court in Tr.P.(C) No. 76/2024 dated 21.11.2024 filed by the appellant, clearly reflects that the proceeding of Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022 was stayed till the returnable date. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that while the stay order is still in force, the respondent procured an ex-parte order in connection with Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022. 5. Paragraph 23 of the order dated 31.07.2025 in Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022 clearly reflects that the proceeding was decided ex-parte. 6. It is submitted that the appellant was not at all aware about the ex-parte order. Despite the order of stay by this Court, the respondent went ahead with the Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022. It is submitted that on 03.08.2025, the respondent came to Mathurapur Police Station and handed over the judgment and order dated 31.07.2025 in Misc. Guardianship Case No. 8/2022 whereby and whereunder, the minor son of the appellant was given in custody of his father i.e. the respondent. 7. The minor son is not at all willing to go with his father. There was no negligence or laches on the part of the appellant in contesting the proceeding. Page No.# 3/3 It is submitted that the impugned ex-parte judgment and order is liable to be set aside and the matter may be heard on merits. 8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions on behalf of the appellant. Annexure-3 of the petition clearly reflects the order of stay granted till the next date of listing, vide order dated 21.11.2024 passed by this Court in Tr.P.(C) No. 76/2024. 9. I have also scrutinized the impugned judgment and order and it is true that the case was decided ex-parte. 10. This Court deems it appropriate that an opportunity may be accorded to the appellant to contest the proceeding. Thereby, the ex-parte order dated 31.07.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court. The appellant is directed to immediately appear before the Trial Court and adduce her evidence and contest the proceeding. 11. In terms of the above observation, this appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant