Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010255832025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./270/2025 ALAUDDIN AHMED SON OF LATE MAMTAJ ALI, RESIDENT OF- NAYANPUR, HOUSE NO.6, BYE LANE NO.2, P.O. DISPUR, P.S. DISPUR, DISTRICT- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN-781005. VERSUS 1: BANK OF BARODA AND 2 ORS REHABARI BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER, HOUSE NO.28, FIRST FLOOR, A.M. ROAD, SUHAGPUR, KAMRUP METRO GUWAHATI 781007. 2:CHIEF MANAGER BANK OF BARODA REHABARI BRANCH HOUSE NO.28 FIRST FLOOR A.M. ROAD SUHAGPUR KAMRUP METRO GUWAHATI 781007. 3:REGIONAL MANAGER BANK OF BARODA BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 781003 ASSAM For the Review Petitioner(s) : Md. B. Hussain, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : .................................... – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 26.11.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) This review petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking modification of the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.5054/2025 inasmuch as in the order, the review petitioner has been Page No.# 2/2 referred to as a “borrower”. Md. B. Hussain, learned counsel submits that the review petitioner is not the borrower but still notices have been issued to him. The issue could be resolved by the review petitioner responding to the notices sent by the Bank regarding his not being the borrower. The afore-noted order, therefore, is modified to the extent that the review petitioner may not be referred to as the borrower and such expression anywhere in the order be only read as “petitioner”. With the afore-noted modification in the order dated 17.10.2025, the review petition stands disposed off. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant