Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010157722026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/344/2026 EVALYN SINGNARPI DAUGHTER OF LATE BAPURAM SINGNAR, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT AGARTALA, TRIPURA, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF LORD ENCLAVE, E-7, BLOCK-B, GUWAHATI, P.S. HATIGAON, P.O. HATIGAON, DISTRICT KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS NASHIR UDDIN AHMED SON OF LATE SAMSER UDDIN AHMED, RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 3, DHARAMNALA, P.O. AND P.S. DIPHU, DISTRICT KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A C SARMA, MR. R BORA,MS R MEDHI,MR G BHARADWAJ Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 31.07.2026 Heard Mr. A. C. Sarma, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. G. Bharadwaj appearing for the petitioner. 2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 27.09.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 2, Karbi Anglong at Diphu in Title Suit No.03/2023. 3. The petitioner is a proforma Defendant No.1 before the Trial Court. She resides at Page No.# 2/2 Agartala in the State of Tripura. She could not come in time to file her written statement and accordingly the Trial Court decided to proceed exparte with the aforesaid case against her on 11.07.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner came to the Court and filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying for setting aside the order directing to proceed exparte with the said case against her. That application was rejected by the learned Trial Court. 4. Mr. Sarma has submitted that the petitioner is a resident of Agartala, Tripura and being a lady, it was difficult for her to come to Diphu to file her written statement in time. 5. I have considered the submissions made by Mr. Sarma. 6. This Court is of the opinion that petitioner should be given one opportunity to contest the case. This view of mine is based on the fact that the petitioner is from Tripura and being a lady, it was difficult for her to come to Diphu to file her written statement in time. 7. Under the given circumstances, the impugned order dated 27.09.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 2, Karbi Anglong at Diphu in Title Suit No.03/2023 is set aside. 8. The petitioner being the proforma defendant No.1 before the Trial Court is allowed to file the written statement. Thereafter the trial court shall proceed to dispose of the case aforementioned in accordance with the procedures as laid down by law. With the aforesaid direction the instant revision petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant