Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010154402017 2025:GAU-AS:17043 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No: I.A.(Civil)/2109/2018 MD. REZAUL HASSAN AND ANR SON OF ABDUR ROUF R/O HOUSE NO. 5 NABAMILAN PATH JURI LODGE BEHIND OLD MLA HOSTEL DISPUR LASTGATE GUWAHATI-06 2: KAMRUL HASSAN SON OF ABDUR ROUF R/O HOUSE NO. 5 NABAMILAN PATH JURI LODGE BEHIND OLD MLA HOSTEL DISPUR LASTGATE GUWAHATI-06 VERSUS SAMSUL HUSSAIN AND ANR S/O LATE SADARON HUSSAIN @ SADRUL HUSSAIN R/O S.S. ROAD LAKHTOKIA GHY-06 2:ABDUR ROUF S/O- SHAMEZ UDDIN R/O- HOUSE NO. 5 NABAMILAN PATH JURI LODGE BEHIND OLD MLA HOSTEL DISPUR LASTGATE Page No.# 2/3 GHY- 6. ------------ Advocate for : MR. A DAS Advocate for : appearing for SAMSUL HUSSAIN AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA ORDER Date : 09.12.2025 Heard Mr. A.C. Sarma, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. I. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. By filing this interlocutory application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with section 151 CPC, the applicants have prayed for impleading their father, namely, Sri Abdur Rouf as respondent in the connected Review Pet. No. 200/2017. 3. In paragraph-6 of this interlocutory application, the applicants have raised a grievance regarding grave misconduct and gross negligent on part of their father in conducting Title Suit No. 150/1997. It is alleged that the guardian of the applicants have failed to exercise due diligence in protecting their interest during their minority. 4. In paragraph-9 of this interlocutory application, the applicants have stated that this Court, while hearing the Review Pet. No. 200/2017, had indicated that as allegations have been made against the guardian, said Sri Abdur Rouf ought to have been made a party in the connected review petition. Accordingly, this interlocutory application. 5. Although the learned counsel for the respondents raised objection to Page No.# 3/3 the prayer made in this interlocutory application, in view of the nature of allegation made by the applicants against their guardian, who is also their father and also considering the statements made in paragraph-5 of this application that the applicants have become major on 11.12.2010 and 17.03.2012 respectively, the prayer made in this interlocutory application stands allowed. 6. Accordingly, Sri Abdur Rouf is permitted to be impleaded as respondent no.2 in the connected Review Pet. No. 200/2017. 7. We allow 2 (two) days’ time to the learned counsel for the applicants to provide freshly typed out copy of the cause title to the AO(J), Second Appeal Section so as to enable the same to be incorporated in the connected Review Pet. No. 200/2017. 8. This interlocutory application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant