Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010007072026 2026:GAU-AS:1831 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/10/2026 SMTI JUNUKI PHUKAN AND 13 ORS W/O LATE PRABINDRANATH PHUKAN, R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON, J.B. ROAD, NEAR KRISHNA NAGAR TINI ALI, JORHAT- 785001 2: ANUPAM PHUKAN S/O LATE JATINDRA NATH PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 3: SMTI. MOUSAM PHUKAN PATHAK D/O LATE JATINDRA NATH PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 4: SMT. MONI PHUKAN W/O LATE BIREN PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 5: AMRIT PHUKAN S/O LATE BIREN PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 6: DHIRAJ PHUKAN S/O LATE BIREN PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 Page No.# 2/7 7: SMT. SANDHYA PHUKAN PUZARI W/O SRI BHABANI PUZARI R/O PARAMOUNT GRAND LOKHARA GUWHAATI- 781034 8: SMT. MINALSHI PHUKAN BARUAH W/O NABAGOBINDA BARUA R/O BELTOLA SUREY AJANTA PATH NEAR TRIPURA BHABAN GUWAHATI-781028 9: SMTI. RINU PHUKAN W/O LATE ROBIN PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 10: ABHINASH PHUKAN S/O LATE ROBIN PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- 785001 11: SMT. PALLABI BORKAKOTY W/O SRI UJJAL BORKOTOKY R/O NAWSOLIA DULIAJAN DIST- TINSUKIA PIN CODE- 786602 12: SMT. ANKANA GOSWAMI W/O ARUP GOSWAMI R/O DULIAJAAN TIPLING DIST- TINSUKIA PIN- 786602 13: RUMAN PHUKAN S/O LATE PRABINDRA NATH PHUKAN R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON J.B. ROAD NEAR KRISHNA NAGAR TINI ALI JORHAT- 785001 14: SINJU PHUKAN S/O LATE PRABINDRA NATH PHUKAN Page No.# 3/7 R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON J.B. ROAD NEAR KRISHNA NAGAR TINI ALI JORHAT- 78500 VERSUS SOURAV KR SARMAH AND 5 ORS S/O LATE SIBA NATH SARMAH, R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON, SARUCHARAI MOUZA, P.S.- JORHAT, DIST.- JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785010 2:SMT. MAITRAYEE SARMAH D/O LATE SIBA NATH SARMAH R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MOUZA P.S.- JORHAT DIST.- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785010 3:SMTI. MANASHI SARMAH D/O LATE SIBA NATH SARMAH R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MOUZA P.S.- JORHAT DIST.- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785010 4:SMTI. BOBITA DAS SARMAH W/O SAURAV KUMAR SARMAH R/O SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MOUZA P.S.- JORHAT DIST.- JORHAT ASSAM PIN- 785010 5:TONY PHUKAN S/O LATE PABAN PHUKAN R/O TARAJAN KAKOTI GAON DIST- JORHAT-1 6:JYOTISH SARMAH GAON BURA SARBAIBONDHA GAON SARUCHARAI MAUZA JORHAT- Page No.# 4/7 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N DEKA, MR. S BANIKYA,A NEWAR,MR. M GOGOI,MR A R BAROOAH,MR GAURAV R DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 11.02.2026 Heard Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. In this petition, under Section 115 of the CPC, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 14.10.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jorhat, in Title Suit No. 62/2012. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order, dated 14.10.2025, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jorhat (‘trial Court’, for short) had disposed of Misc. (J) Case No. 126/2024, and thereby, dismissed the plea for deciding the preliminary issue so framed, as to whether the suit is barred by the principle of res-judicata or not. 4. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the predecessors of the plaintiffs of Title Suit No. 62/2012, had instituted a title suit, being Title Suit No. 14/1982, in respect of a plot of land, measuring 4 bighas 1 katha 3 lechas, of Dag No. 1070 and 1 bigha 1 lecha of Dag No. 1133, under P.P. No. 147, situated at Sarbaibandha Gaon, Sarucharai Mouza, Jorhat, and that the said Title Suit No. 14/1982, was partly decreed, vide judgment and decree dated 25.11.1999, and thereby, declared the plaintiffs’/respondents’ right only Page No.# 5/7 over 2 kathas of land including the house thereon, by adverse possession and held that the remaining suit land were belonging to the defendants/petitioners. Mr. Deka also submits that the said judgment and decree was challenged in Title Appeal No. 2/2000, but the same came to be dismissed, vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2011, and thereafter, one Misc. (J) Case No. 38/2011, was filed for review of the aforementioned judgment and order, but the same was also dismissed on 29.08.2012, and thus, the judgment and decree dated 25.11.1999, attained finality. 4.1. Mr. Deka also submits that the present petitioners, being defendants, had filed one petition on 06.09.2012, before the Circle Officer, West Circle for demarcation of land and showing boundary of 8 bighas 6 lechas and 2 kathas 10 lechas, of Dag No. 1133, under P.P. No. 147, situated at Sarbaibandha Gaon, Sarucharai Mouza, Jorhat, and that though initially, the respondents had taken part in the demarcation process, but later on, they had opposed the same and filed Title Suit No. 62/2012. Mr. Deka further submits that the petitioners being the defendants had appeared and filed their written statement-cum-counter- claim and during the pendency of the proceeding, the petitioners had filed an application under Order 14 Rule 2 CPC for framing of the issue of res-judicata as preliminary issue, and the said application was allowed, vide order dated 22.11.2024. 4.2. Mr. Deka further submits that however, the learned trial Court, vide impugned order dated 14.10.2025, had dismissed the said application by holding that the plaint could not be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, on the ground of plea of res-judicata, although it was incumbent upon the learned trial Court as it had already framed the preliminary issue and without deciding the said issue, the learned trial Court proceeded with the matter as if it was an Page No.# 6/7 application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Mr. Deka further submits that it is a fact that the petitioners had filed one application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, but the same was withdrawn and it is reflected in the impugned order dated 22.11.2024, by the learned trial Court and despite, the learned trial Court had proceeded with the matter as if it had passed the impugned order to deal with an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Under such circumstances, Mr. Deka submits that the impugned order suffers from serious infirmity and it had also caused serious prejudice to the petitioners, and as such, Mr. Deka has contended to interfere with the same. 5. Having heard the submission of Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also perused the impugned order dated 14.10.2025. 6. It appears that the learned trial Court, on the application filed by the petitioners under Order 14 Rule 2 CPC, had framed one preliminary issue on the point of res-judicata and in that view of the matter, instead of proceeding to dispose of the said application, the learned trial Court had misdirected itself and passed the impugned order as if it has dealt with an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. And on such count, the impugned order suffers from serious infirmity as it causes serious prejudice to the petitioners and on such count, the same requires interference of this Court. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 14.10.2025, stands set aside and quashed. The matter stands relegated to the learned trial Court, with a direction to proceed with the matter and to decide the issue of res-judicata after affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. Page No.# 7/7 8. In terms of above, this revision petition stands disposed of at this motion stage itself, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant