Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010063902024 2025:GAU-AS:7649 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/191/2024 NARAYAN CHANDRA PAUL S/O LATE SUNIL KR. PAUL. RESIDENT OF DHARMASALA PART III, PO DHARMASALA, PS AND DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM 783324 VERSUS BIMAL KR PAUL AND 6 ORS S/O LATE LAKHIKANTA PAUL. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF SHANTINAGAR, WARD NO. 7, GOALPARA TOWN,PO BALADMARI, PS AND DIST GOALPARA, ASSAM 783121 2:DULAL CH. PAUL S/O LATE LAKHIKANTA PAUL. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF COLLEGE ROAD GOSSAIGAON PO AND PS GOSSAIGAON DIT KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM 783360 3:SUKAMAL KR. PAUL S/O LATE KAMAKHYA CHARAN PAUL PERMANENT RESIDENT OF R.K MISSION ROAD WARD NO. 15 DHUBRI PO AND PS AND DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 783325 Page No.# 2/6 4:HARIPADA PAUL S/O LATE KAMAKHYA CHARAN PAUL. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF RAJAPARA GOSSAIGAON PO AND PS GOSSAIGAON DIST KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM 783360 5:PRANJAL PAUL S/O LATE ANIL KR. PAUL. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF COLLEGE ROAD GOSSAIGAON PO AND PS GOSSAIGAON DIST KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM 783360 6:RATAN CH. PAUL S/O LATE SUNIL KR. PAUL.RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DHARMASALA PART III PO DHARMASALA PS AND DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 783324 7:PRADIP KR. PAUL S/O LATE SUNIL KR. PAUL.RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DHARMASALA PART III PO DHARMASALA PS AND DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 78332 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Mobaraque, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. G. Bharadwaj, Advocate BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 11.06.2025 Heard Mr. A. Mobaraque, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. G. Bharadwaj, the learned counsel appearing on Page No.# 3/6 behalf of the respondents. 2. The supervisory jurisdiction of this Court have been invoked in challenging the order dated 07.10.2023 passed in Title Suit No.17/2019 by the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Dhubri (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) whereby the Petition No.3475/2023, Petition No.3527/2023 and Petition No.3532/2023 were rejected. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner at the outset submitted that there is no challenge in the present proceedings to the order dated 07.10.2023 insofar as rejecting the Petition No.86/2021 whereby the defendants had sought rejection of the plaint. Under such circumstances, the question which arises before this Court is whether the learned Trial Court was justified in rejecting the Petition No.3475/2023, Petition No.3527/2023 and Petition No.3532/2023 on the ground that the suit had proceeded to the stage of filing of evidence of the plaintiff. 4. It is relevant to take note of that the provisions contained in Order XI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) relates to interrogatories, discovery and inspection. This provision contained in Order XI read with Section 30 of the Code helps in ascertaining the truth and the Supreme Court in the case of Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes and Others Vs. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira (Dead) Through LRS. reported in (2012) 5 SCC 370 observed that these provisions ought to be frequently used by the Judicial Officers for ascertaining the truth. 5. It is seen that the Petition No.3532/2023 pertains to seeking leave in terms with Order XI Rule 1 of the Code and Petition No. 3527/2023 was Page No.# 4/6 the list of interrogatories so submitted. Taking into account that the answers to the interrogatories not only would aid in ascertaining the truth of the matter but would also lead to an early culmination of the dispute, the leave so sought for in terms with Order XI Rule 1 of the Code is required to be liberally allowed. However, it is noted that the learned Trial Court did not allow the leave merely on the ground that the issues have been framed and the trial had started. 6. It is relevant to take note that the evidence is yet to be adduced and as such, the hearing of the suit had not started on the date on which the applications were filed and the impugned order was passed. Under such circumstances, it is the opinion of this Court that the learned Trial Court ought to have granted the leave thereby allowing the Petition No.3532/2023 and allowed the plaintiffs to answer the interrogatories as raised in the Petition No.3527/2023. The learned Trial Court having not done so in the opinion of this Court, committed an error in exercise of jurisdiction. 7. Let this Court now take into account the Petition No.3475/2023 which is a petition filed under Order XI Rule 12 of the Code for discovery of documents. It is seen from a perusal of the said application that discovery of ten documents have been sought for. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of the provision of Order XI Rule 12 of the Code which stipulates that the learned Trial Court has the power to either refuse if satisfied that such discovery is not necessary or not necessary at the stage of the suit or make such order generally or limited to certain clauses of documents. But the learned Trial Court had rejected the petition only on the ground that the suit had proceeded to the stage of Page No.# 5/6 trial. This again appears to be an error in exercise of jurisdiction. 8. Consequently, this Court therefore disposes of the instant petition with the following observations and directions: (i) This Court grants the leave in respect to petition No.3532/2023. (ii) This Court further grants the leave to the petitioner who is the Defendant No.1 in the suit to submit those interrogatories to the plaintiffs. (iii) The plaintiffs are granted the liberty to take recourse to Rule 6 and Rule 7 of Order XI of the Code, if so advised. However, if no such steps are taken within the time stipulated in the said Rules from the date fixed for appearance of the parties by this Court hereinafter, the plaintiffs shall have to answer to the interrogatories in the manner provided under Order XI of the Code. (iv) Taking into account that the learned Trial Court did not exercise its jurisdiction in respect to the petition No.3475/2023 in the manner provided under Order XI Rule 12 of the Code, this Court directs the learned Trial Court to hear the said application being Petition No.3475/2023 afresh and decide as to whether the discovery of the documents so mentioned in the said petition ought to be allowed or not within the purview of Order XI Rule 12 of the Code. (v) It is seen that further proceedings of Title Suit No.17/2019 was stayed by this Court vide the order dated 12.06.2024. The said stay order stands vacated and parties herein are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 21.07.2025. (vi) The period in terms with Rule 6 and 7 of Order XI of the Code shall Page No.# 6/6 be counted insofar as the plaintiffs are concerned with effect from 28.07.2025. JUDGE Comparing Assistant