Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010112112026 2026:GAU-AS:11896 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/222/2026 RAJA SINGHA S/O LATE BRAJA KISHORE SINGHA,VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI,P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA, DISTRICT- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782442. VERSUS RANJIT SINGHA AND 7 ORS. S/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA), VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI,P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA, DISTRICT- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782442 2:KUMARI DEVI D/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA) VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442 3:KHOIMAN DEVI D/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA) VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442 4:NEHA DEVI D/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA) VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI Page No.# 2/4 ASSAM PIN- 782442 5:RATONI DEVI D/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA) VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442 6:URIVEI DEVI D/O LATE SONATAMBI DEVI (W/O LATE LALIT SINGHA) VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442 7:NARJIT SINGHA S/O LATE LALIT SINGHA VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442 8:SMTI. KUNJALATA W/O LATE MOINA SINGHA VILLAGE- NO. 1 PIPAL PUKHURI P.O. AND P.S.- LANKA DISTRICT- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 78244 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID, MS. M R DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N B P SINGHA(R1TO7), Page No.# 3/4 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 20.08.2026 Heard Mr. A. Roshid, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. NBP Singha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 23.04.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Sankardev Nagar, Hojai, in Title Suit No.15/2010. 3. The petitioner had filed the suit before the court below praying for a decree declaring his possessory right over the suit land and for ejectment of the respondents therefrom. The suit land is an annual patta land. So far as annual patta lands are concerned, the State holds the title over such lands. But in the plaint, State was not made a party. Moreover, the suit was filed for 4 Bighas 1 Katha 12 Lechas of land. But one part of the land measuring 1 Katha 9 Lechas was already acquired by the State for construction of the National Highway. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, the petitioners filed an application before the trial court under Order 3 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and prayed permission for withdrawal of the suit so that he can file it afresh. 5. The learned trial court, after hearing both sides, rejected the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that a formal defect does not affect the merit of the case while a substantive defect might affect the suit. 6. Mr. Roshid submits that there is no doubt that in a case pertaining to annual Page No.# 4/4 patta land the State Government must be made a party and for that matter, the petitioner has to comply with the provisions of law as laid down in Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Mr. Roshid submits that it has to be done before filing of the suit. 7. Mr. Roshid further submitted that one part of the suit land mentioned in the plaint was already taken away by the State for construction of the National Highway. So, the schedule of the plaint has to be changed. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 9. This Court is of the opinion that the suit of the petitioner would fail because of the aforesaid facts. There are sufficient grounds to allow the petitioner to institute a fresh suit for the subject-matter of the suit. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order dated 23.04.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Sankardev Nagar, Hojai, in Title Suit No.15/2010 is set aside. The trial court shall allow withdrawal of the suit and allow it to file it afresh. With the aforesaid direction, the revision petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant