Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010030032026 2026:GAU-AS:2573 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/45/2026 MUSSTT. KAMALA BEGUM MAZUMDER WIFE OF MD. MOIDUL ISLAM MAZUMDER, RESIDENT OF SONABARIGHAT PART- I, PORGONAH- SONAPUR, P.S.- SILCHAR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS AZIZUR REHMAN MAZUMDER AND 10 ORS. SON OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER, R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I, PORGONAH-SONAPUR, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-788013 2:PARUL ISLAM MAZUMDER SON OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 3:KADRUL ISLAM MAZUMDER SON OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 4:SAHA ALOM MAZUMDER SON OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I Page No.# 2/6 PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 5:AKTARA BEGUM MAZUMDER DAUGHTER OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 6:SITARA BEGUM MAZUMDER DAUGHTER OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 7:SULTANA BEGUM MAZUMDER DAUGHTER OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 8:RUSTANA BEGUM MAZUMDER DAUGHTER OF LATE ASADDAR ALI MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 9:FOJIRUN NESSSA MAZUMDER WIDOW OF LATE SAIB UDDIN MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR Page No.# 3/6 ASSAM PIN-788013 10:HAJIRUN BEGUM MAZUMDER WIFE OF LATE SAHARUL ISLAM MAZUMDER R/O SONABARIGHAT PART-I PORGONAH-SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788013 11:SAJJAD HUSSAIN MAZUMDER SON OF LATE SAHARUL ISLAM MAZUMDER RESIDENT OF SONABARIGHAT PART- I PORGONAH- SONAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM 788013 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHAKRABARTY, MS D.CHAKRABARTY Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 20.02.2026 Heard Mr. D. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.12.2025, and the subsequent order dated 20.01.2026, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4, Cachar, Silchar, in petition No. 65/14, connected with Misc. (J) Case No. 371/2025, arising out of Title Suit No. 95/2025. 3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 22.12.2025, and the Page No.# 4/6 subsequent order dated 20.01.2026, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4, Cachar, Silchar (‘Trial Court’, for short) had allowed the prayer for adjournment by the respondent Nos. 9 and 10. 4. Mr. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed one title suit, being Title Suit No. 95/2025, along with Misc. (J) Case No 371/2025, before the learned Trial Court on 26.06.2025, and the same is pending. Mr. Chakrabarty also submits that thereafter, vide order dated 03.07.2025, the prayer of the petitioner for ad-interim injunction, made in Misc. (J) Case No. 371/2025, dispensing with the notice, was not granted, instead notice was issued, and as in the schedule land the respondents continued with the construction work, on 14.07.2025, the petitioner had filed one petition for appointment of Advocate’s Commissioner and inspection of schedule land, and thereafter, vide order dated 17.07.2025, notice was issued to the respondents in petition No. 65/14. Mr. Chakrabarty further submits that thereafter, on 23.07.2025, 30.07.2025 and 08.09.2025, adjournments were sought for by respondent Nos. 1, 9 and 10, for filing objection against injunction petition and in the petition No. 65/14. And thereafter, vide order dated 22.09.2025, the learned Trial Court had decided to proceed ex-parte against all the respondents/defendants, except respondent/defendant No. 1. Mr. Chakrabarty also submits that thereafter, on 22.12.2025, written objection was filed by the respondent No. 1 in petition No. 65/14 and adjournment petition was filed by the respondent Nos. 9 and 10, seeking time to file written objection, which was allowed, vide impugned order dated 22.12.2025. Thereafter, on 20.01.2026, the matter was again adjourned by giving opportunity to the respondent Nos. 9 and 10 for filing objection even in the absence of the said respondents without steps. Page No.# 5/6 4.1. By drawing attention of this Court to the order dated 22.09.2025, passed by the learned Trial Court, Mr. Chakrabarty submits that vide the said order, the learned Trial Court had decided to proceed ex-parte against all the respondents/defendants, except respondent/defendant No. 1, for failing to file written objection, and thereafter, allowing the respondent/defendant Nos. 9 and 10 to file their objection without the order dated 22.09.2025, being vacated, and as such, the impugned orders dated 22.12.2025 and 20.01.2026, suffer from serious illegality and as such, Mr. Chakrabarty has contended to interfere with the same. 5. Having heard the submission of Mr. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also perused the impugned order dated 22.12.2025, and the subsequent order dated 20.01.2026, and also the order dated 22.09.2025. 6. It appears that vide order dated 22.09.2025, the learned Trial Court had decided to proceed ex-parte against all the respondents/defendants, except respondent/defendant No. 1, and fixed the matter on 22.10.2025, for written statement. But, subsequently, vide impugned order dated 22.12.2025, in Misc. (J) Case No. 371/2025, the learned Trial Court had allowed the respondent/defendant Nos. 9 and 10 to file objection and vide impugned order dated 20.01.2026, the learned Trial Court had granted further time to file objection. 7. Since vide order dated 22.09.2025, the learned Trial Court had decided to proceed against the respondent/defendant Nos. 9 and 10 ex-parte, for remaining absent without steps on that day, subsequently, allowing them to file objection, vide impugned order dated 22.12.2025, and also vide subsequent impugned order dated 20.01.2026, appears to be arbitrary and illegal and on Page No.# 6/6 such count, the same requires interference of this Court. 8. In the result, this Court finds sufficient merit in this petition and accordingly, the same stands allowed. 9. Consequently, the impugned order dated 22.12.2025, and the subsequent impugned order dated 20.01.2026, stand set aside and quashed. 10. The learned Trial Court shall proceed with Title Suit No. 95/2025, in accordance with the order passed on 22.09.2025, till the same is vacated or modified. 11. In terms of above, this revision petition stands disposed of at this motion stage itself. JUDGE Comparing Assistant