Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010146822026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/325/2026 SMT. KUSUM LAHKAR AND ANR W/O LATE BHOGDUTTA LAHKAR, R/O SONIAPARIA, MADHUPUR, P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM, PIN- 784170, DIST- BISWANATH, ASSAM 2: DIMBESWAR LAHKAR S/O LATE BHOGDUTTA LAHKAR R/O SONIAPARIA MADHUPUR P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN- 784170 DIST- BISWANATH ASSA VERSUS GOLAP SINGH AND 5 ORS. S/O LATE KRIPA SINGH, RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI, P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM, PIN-784170, DISTRICT- BISWANATH, ASSAM. 2:LAKHI SINGH S/O LATE KRIPA SINGH RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN-784170 DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM. 3:MUNINDRA SINGH S/O LATE KRIPA SINGH RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN-784170 DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM. Page No.# 2/3 4:TIKENDRA SINGH S/O KARTIK SINGH RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN-784170 DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM. 5:KHANENDRA SINGH S/O KARTIK SINGH RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN-784170 DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM. 6:LAKHIDHAR TAMULI S/O L. TAMULI RESIDENT OF AMLOKHI DOLONI P.O. AND P.S.- HELEM PIN-784170 DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORDOLOI (LEGAL AID COUNSEL), Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 24 .0 7 . 2026 Heard Mr. P. Bordoloi, learned legal aid counsel for the petitioners. This application is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 of the CPC against the impugned order dated 04.04.2026, passed by the learned Civil Judge(Senior Divn.), Biswanath at Biswanath Chariali, Tezpur in TS No. 5/2023 whereby the petitioner as plaintiff was allowed to withdraw the suit filed by him imposing a cost of Rs. 10,000/-upon the petitioner. Page No.# 3/3 It is observed in the impugned order dated 04.04.2026 that the defects for non impalement of the necessary party in the suit and errors in the cause of action and other legal facts can be considered as formal defects constituting sufficient the grounds for the relief sought and it is also observed that the application has not been filed at a belated stage although there has been considerable delay after filing of the suit which has caused harassment to the defendant. For that reason, a cost of Rs. 10,000/- has been imposed. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that only the written statement has been submitted and no further proceeding has taken place. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- awarded as cost by the learned trial Court is excessive as the plaintiff is at present living below poverty line and in the present petition, the petitioner cannot afford private counsel and sought appointment of legal aid counsel. On instruction received the learned Legal Aid Counsel submitted that the petitioner is capable and willing to pay Rs. 2,000/- which under the aforesaid facts and circumstances considered to be a reasonable sum and can be accepted without issuing notice to the respondent. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by reducing the cost imposed from Rs. 10,000/ to Rs. 2,000/- Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant