Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010046392025 2025:GAU-AS:4685 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/99/2025 NOBIN GOGOI S/O- LATE HEMA GOGOI, R/O- KHARAGARH GHURACHUA GAON, P.O- KHEMDOIPUKHURI, P.S AND DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM VERSUS SAMAR DAS S/O- LATE ROSIK LAL DAS, R/O- A.M. ROAD, AMGURI TOWN, P.S AND P.O- AMGURI, DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, MR A AHMED,U U KHAN,MR. M A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 11.04.2025 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 08.11.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Sivasagar, passed in Page No.# 2/3 Title Suit No. 156/2006. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 08.11.2024, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Sivasagar had dismissed the petition No. 749/2024, filed by the petitioner herein to call for the N.J. case records, vide which the respondent herein had deposited the rent before the Court. 4. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pleaded case of the petitioner is that without approaching the petitioner first, the respondent herein had deposited the rent before the Court and to substantiate the said plea, the records of the N.J. case, vide which the respondent herein had deposited the rent before the Court, are very much necessary, and therefore, Mr. Ahmed has contended to allow this petition. 5. Having heard the submission of Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed and also perused the impugned order dated 08.11.2024. 6. In view of the stand so taken by the petitioner in Title Suit No. 156/2006, and also in view of the submission of Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the N.J. case records, vide which the respondent herein had deposited the rent before the Court, are very much necessary to substantiate the stand so taken by the petitioner in his pleadings. It is to be noted here that fair trial is the fundamental right of the parties and in fair trial, fair opportunities have to be given to the parties. In the case in hand, such an opportunity is denied to the petitioner by refusing to call for the N.J. case records. 7. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 08.11.2024, appears to be illegal and arbitrary and therefore, the same stands set aside and Page No.# 3/3 quashed. 8. The learned trial Court is directed to call for the N.J. case records from the Office of the Sheristadar, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Sivasagar. 9. In terms of above, this revision petition stands disposed of at this motion stage itself. JUDGE Comparing Assistant