Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010132072026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : FAO/42/2026 ANIL CHOUDHURY S/O LATE BABUL CHOUDHURY, R/O TETELIA, NEAR GANESH MANDIR, P.S.- JALUKBARI, DIST.- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN- 781011. VERSUS SMT. BHANU PRABHA DAS W/O LATE PARESH CH. DAS, R/O BATA BUILDING, MALIGAON CHARIALI, GUWAHATI, P.S.- JALUKBARI, DIST.- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN- 781012 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J K DAS, MR. DHANANJAY TALUKDAR,MR. TAPOBRAT CHHETRI,MR. A GANGULY Advocate for the Respondent : MR. K KALITA, MR BASAB DEY,MR P C DEY Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/2848/2026 SMT BHANU PRABHA DAS W/O LATE PARESH CH. DAS R/O BATA BUILDING MALIGAON CHARIALI GUWAHATI P.S.- JALUKBARI DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM PIN- 781012 VERSUS ANIL CHOUDHURY Page No.# 2/3 S/O LATE BABUL CHOUDHURY R/O TETELIA NEAR GANESH MANDIR P.S.- JALUKBARI DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM PIN- 781011 ------------ Advocate for : MR. K KALITA Advocate for : MR. A GANGULY appearing for ANIL CHOUDHURY BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 07.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. Ganguli, the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant. Also heard Mr. P. C. Dey, the learned counsel for the sole respondent, who submits that in this appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant has impugned an order passed on 31.03.2026 by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 2, Kamrup (M), in Misc. (J) Case No. 160/2026, in connection with Title Suit No. 32/2026, whereby the Trial Court refused to grant ad interim temporary injunction to the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that since the impugned order was passed by the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lies before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kamrup (M), and this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the instant appeal. Page No.# 3/3 3. On this, the learned counsel for the appellant prays for allowing the appellant to withdraw the instant appeal with liberty to file the same before the appropriate court. 4. He also submits that since there is a question of limitation in filing the aforesaid appeal, hence, the time spent by the appellant during pendency of the instant appeal in this Court may be excluded from the period of limitation for filing the appeal before the appropriate forum. 5. The prayer is allowed. 6. This appeal is dismissed on withdrawal, with the liberty sought for granted to the appellant. 7. The appellant would also get the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act for exclusion time, during which the present appeal was pending before this Court while computing the period of limitation for filing the appeal before the appropriate forum. 8. Consequently, the interim order granted in this appeal on earlier occasion stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant