Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010272662024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/135/2025 MD. YUNUS KHAN @ YUNIS S/O LATE SAHJAHAN KHAN @ SAHJHAN @SAJAHAN, R/O WARD NO. 18, BHATTHI MUHALLA, MOHAMMADABAD, YUSUFPUR, GHAZIPUR, UTTAR PRADESH, PIN-233227 (REPRESENTED BY HIS LAWFUL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MD. PARWEZ ALAM, S/O MD. YUNUS KHAN, R/O WARD NO. 18, BHATTHI MUHALLA, MOHAMMADABAD, YUSUFPUR, GHAZIPUR, UTTAR PRADESH, PIN-233227) VERSUS PINKU GOGOI AND 3 ORS. S/O NAKUL GOGOI, R/O NAHAR ALI, SONARI TOWN, WARD NO. 1, P.O. AND P.S.- SONARI, DIST- CHARAIDEO, ASSAM, PIN-785690 2:SMTI. MOUSUMI GOGOI W/O SRI PINKU GOGOI R/O NAHAR ALI SONARI TOWN WARD NO. 1 P.O. AND P.S.- SONARI DIST- CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690 3:SMTI RUPALIM BORAH BURAGOHAIN W/O SRI PRANJEET BORGOHAIN R/O SONARI TOWN WARD NO. 13 P.O. AND P.S.- SONARI DIST- CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690 Page No.# 2/3 4:SMT. RITAMONI DUARAH W/O SRI HEMANTA DUARAH R/O JUGAMAYA PATH PHUKAN NAGAR P.O.- SIVASAGAR P.S.- SIVASAGAR DIST- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN-78564 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P BORAH, Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 08.04.2025 Heard Mr. H. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 30.09.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charaideo, in Title Suit No. 01/2024. 3. Mr. Boruah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the defendant No. 1 in Title Suit No. 01/2024 and the petitioner could not appear before the learned trial court on 13.05.2024, for which, the learned trial court had decided to proceed the matter ex-parte against the present petitioner. Thereafter, on 30.09.2024, the petitioner had filed an application No. 290/2024, under Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the CPC for setting aside the ex-parte order dated 13.05.2024. But, the learned trial court had directed to register a Misc. (J) Case upon the petition No. 290/2024 and also observed that the petitioner definitely refers to Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC. Mr. Boruah further submits that the case of the petitioner is covered under Order 9 Rule 7 not under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Page No.# 3/3 CPC as observed by the learned trial court. 4. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record. 5. It appears that nothing has been determined/decided vide impugned order passed by the learned trial court till date, though an observation is made in the impugned order dated 30.09.2024, that the petition filed by the petitioner refers to Order 9 Rule 13 not Order 9 Rule 7 of the CPC. It also appears that the learned trial court had directed to register a Misc. (J) Case upon the petition No. 290/2024 and thereafter, the matter will be heard giving opportunity to both the parties to present their case.. 6. Under such circumstances, this court is inclined to dispose of this petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue before the learned trial court at the time of hearing of petition No. 290/2024, that his case is covered under Order 9 Rule 7 not under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC. 7. In terms of above, this CRP(IO) stands disposed of at the motion stage itself. JUDGE Comparing Assistant