Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010277452024 2025:GAU-AS:24 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/550/2024 NAYANJYOTI BRAHMA S/O- LATE SUBHA KUMAR BRAHMA, R/O- VILL.- TUNKUBARI, P.O. AND P.S. SIDLI, DIST. CHIRANG, BTAD, ASSAM VERSUS RANI HELEN WARY AND ANR D/O- LATE DHIRENDRA WARY, R/O- BAGANSALI, WARD NO. 07, KAKRAJHAR TOWN, P.O., P.S. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN- 783370. 2:SMT. RWISUMWI BRAHMA W/O- SRI GENIUS BRAHMA R/O- BAGANSALI WARD NO. 07 KAKRAJHAR TOWN P.O. P.S. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 783370 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A IKBAL, MS. M NATH,MS. J SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 03.01.2025 Heard Mr. A. Ikbal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioner has put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the impugned order dated 22.10.2024, passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), at Kokrajhar in Misc. (J) Case No. 09/2023, arising out of Title Suit No. 03/2018, whereby the learned trial Court has allowed the plaintiff, the respondent herein to file amended plaint. 3. Mr. Ikbal, learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the impugned order, basically on two grounds:- (i) That, the learned Trial Court has allowed amendment in a routine manner and nothing has been mentioned in the petition to show due diligence on the part of the respondents. (ii) That, the subject matter of the Title Suit No.03/2018, relates to matrimonial disputes as the same concerned with the marriage between the present petitioner and the respondent and such a plea was taken in the written objection at Paragraph No.7, filed by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, but, the same has not been dealt with properly by the learned trial Court and as per Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the matter ought to have been filed before the learned District Judge, Kokrajhar. 4. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and Page No.# 3/4 also perused the impugned order dated 22.10.2024, and also perused the written objection which is enclosed in the petition as Annexure-4, at page No.58 of this petition. 5. It is well settled in catena of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court that all amendments may be allowed which are necessary for determining the real question of controversy between the parties, provided the same does not cause any injustice or prejudice to the other side. Reference in this context can be made to a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu Vs. Suman Agarwal (Bindal) & Ors in Civil Leave Petition (Civil) No. 30324/2019, wherein it has been held as under:- (i) All amendments are to be allowed which are necessary for determining the real question in controversy provided it does not cause any injustice or prejudice the other side. This is mandatory as is apparent from the use of the word “shall” in the latter part of Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC. Court should avoid a hyper- technical approach, ordinarily the liberal, especially when the opposite party can be compensated by cost; (ii) Amendment may be justifiably allowed where it is intended to rectify the absence of material particulars in the plaint or introduced an additional or an approach; (iii) Amendment should not change the cause of action so as to set up a plaint entirely new cause, foreign to the case set up in the plaint. 6. Having examined the impugned order, in the light of the aforesaid proposition of law, this Court is unable to accord consequence to the submission of Mr. Ikbal, learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned trial Court had committed nay illegality or infirmity in allowing the amendment of the plaint as Page No.# 4/4 the same is necessary to determine the real question of controversy between the parties. 7. However, having gone through the impugned order dated 22.10.2024, and also the stand taken by the petitioner specially in paragraph No. 7 of the written objection, that the subject matter of the Title Suit No. 03/2018, relates to matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the respondent and as per provision of Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act the matter would to have been filed before the learned District Judge, Kokrajhar. 8. In that view of the matter this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the petitioner to approach the learned trial Court again by filing a petition raising the issue of jurisdiction and in the event of filing such an application, the learned trial court shall proceed to hear and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 9. In terms of above, this CRP(IO) stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant