Page No.# 1/4 GAHC020002302026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/62/2026 SHRI LEPDEN S/O LATE TSUKJEMANGSHI, R/O HOUSE NO. 222, INDUSTRIAL VILLAGE RAZHUPHE, D.C. COURT AREA, WEST POLICE STATION, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND, 797112 VERSUS SHRI A. YANANG KONYAK SHRI A. YANANG KONYAK, S/O LATE ANGMUNG KONYAK, R/O TIZIT TOWN, MON DISTRICT, NAGALAND - 798602 Advocate for the Petitioner : MEDO VERO, Advocate for the Respondent : , Linked Case : C. REVN/6/2025 SHRI LEPDEN S/O LATE TSUKJEMANGSHI R/O HOUSE NO. 222 INDUSTRIAL VILLAGE RAZHUPHE D.C. COURT AREA WEST POLICE STATION DIMAPUR NAGALAND-797112 Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS SHRI A. YANANG KONYAK S/O LATE ANGMUNG KONYAK R/O TIZIT TOWN MON DISTRICT NAGALAND-798602 ------------ Advocate for : MRINAL KALITA Advocate for : I LIMATOSHI appearing for SHRI A. YANANG KONYAK BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 20-04-2026 Heard Mr. Medo Vero, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner and also heard Mr. Toshitemjen Pongener, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner seeking to make certain amendments in the connected Civil revision petition which has been enumerated at para 6 of the application. The said paragraph is reproduced herein below:- “6. Proposed amendments: The Petitioner seeks permission to amend the Civil Revision Petition as follows- a) At page 10 after the existing paragraph 15 of the Civil Revision Petition the following additional paragraphs shall be inserted: Page No.# 3/4 That the petitioner states that, because of wrong advise of the earlier engaged Counsel, the necessary petition seeking leave to defend could not be filed on the day of entering the appearance by the Defendant/Petitioner on 10/08/2022 and the Defendant/Petitioner intend to contest the Suit as he never acknowledged his liability towards the Respondent/Plaintiff. b) The existing Paragraph No. 16 of the Civil Revision Petition at Page No. 10 may be amended as follows: That the petitioner states that he has good grounds for making this petition and as such unless the impugned Order dated 10/08/2022, 10/06/2025 and 29/08/2023 are stayed, it will create a havoc on the proceeding. The petitioner has, therefore, balance of convenience in his favour. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to entertain this petition and pass an Order of Stay against the impugned Orders in the interest of justice and fair play. c) At Page No. 15 after Ground No. J, new ground may be added: For that the impugned order dated 10/08/2022 is bad in law as the petitioner was deprived from contesting the suit as the same is not a legal and valid Order and is not maintainable in the eyes of law. d) At Page Nos. 15-16 in the Prayer portion of the Civil Revision Petition, impugned Order dated 10/08/2022 may be added along with the other impugned Orders.” 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner that the notices have been issued in the civil revision and that allowing the amendments in the petition is necessary in the interest of justice, failing which he would suffer prejudice. 4. The learned counsel for the sole respondent fairly submits that he has no objection to allowing the amendments in the civil revision petition. Page No.# 4/4 5. I have considered the matter. 6. The aforesaid amendment sought to be made by the applicant/petitioner is hereby allowed. 7. Accordingly, the said amendments may be incorporated and fresh civil revision petition incorporating the amendments shall be filed and a copy furnished to the learned counsel for the respondent. 8. The interlocutory application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant