Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010160662026 2026:GAU-AS:11880 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/149/2026 MAHESH KUMAR YADAV S/O LATE JAI GOBIND YADAV, R/O GRAHAM BAZAR, P.O, P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN-786001. VERSUS PRADEEP KUMAR VERMA AND 7 ORS. S/O BALIRAM VERMA, R/O GRAHAM BAZAR, P.O, P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM. PIN-786125 2:JAINENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA S/O SURESH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 3:SAMIR KUMAR THAKUR S/O LATE JANAKDAC THAKUR R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 4:JOYPRAKASH SAHU S/O RAGHUNATH SAHU R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 5:DINESH THAKUR Page No.# 2/4 S/O LATE JANAKDAC THAKUR R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 6:JOYPRAKASH GUPTA S/O JAGADISH PRASAD GUPTA R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 7:KAMAKHYA PRASAD SHAH S/O LATE MUTHARI SHAH R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 8:THE GRAHAMBAZAR PUJA COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS OFFICE BEARERS ABOVE NAMED R/O GRAHAM BAZAR P.O P.S. AND DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. PIN-786125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM, A R MONDAL,MR A HAWARI Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B BARUAH (FOR CAVEATOR), I L NGAMLAI (FOR CAVEATOR) :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 19.08.2026 Heard Mr. S. Islam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Heard Mr. B. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/caveators. Page No.# 3/4 2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 13.07.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) No.1, Dibrugarh in Misc. (J) Case No.127/2025 arising out of Title Execution Case No.14/2025. 3. The present petitioner fought the legal battle starting from the court of the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) to the highest court of the country. He lost in all the forums. Now, he has decided to try his luck in the execution proceeding. He filed a petition under Order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Executing Court dismissed his application. 4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 5. This Court is of the opinion that at this stage, the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India becomes relevant. The main grounds on which the High Court interferes under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are – 1. When the inferior Courts act arbitrarily. 2. When the inferior Courts act in excess of the Jurisdiction vested in them. 3. When the inferior Courts fail to exercise jurisdiction vested in them. 6. It is pertinent to note that the High Court does not interfere for correcting mere error of fact or, with a finding of the subordinate court which is within the jurisdiction of such court. However, if, such finding is perverse in such a sense that no prudent person having knowledge of law could have arrived at such finding, or the finding is not based on any material evidence or, such a finding results in manifest injustice or if there is a misdirection in law, then the High Court can interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Page No.# 4/4 7. Coming back to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Executing Court has not committed any jurisdictional error while passing the impugned order. This is not a fit case for exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The present application is found to be devoid of merit and stands dismissed accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant