Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010058352026 2026:GAU-AS:7340 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : FAO/22/2026 DAIBAKI DAS AND 9 ORS. W/O LATE CHANDRADHAR DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 2: ARABINDA DAS S/O LATE CHANDRADHAR DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 3: NARAYAN DAS S/O LATE CHANDRADHAR DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 4: KHARGESWAR DAS S/O LATE CHANDRADHAR DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL Page No.# 2/8 P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 5: ANIL DAS S/O LATE CHANDRADHAR DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 6: NRIPEN DAS S/O LATE KHAGEN DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 7: PRADIP DAS S/O LATE KHAGEN DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 8: AKSHAY DAS S/O LATE KHAGEN DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 9: SMTI. DILIPI DAS W/O LATE MATIRAM DAS Page No.# 3/8 R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 10: DEBOJYOTI DAS S/O LATE MATIRAM DAS R/O ATHGAON RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781030 VERSUS BIPUL TAMULI AND 2 ORS. S/O LATE SRIDHAR TAMULI R/O NAJIRAKHAT RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI PIN-781030 2:KALPA JYOTI TAMULI S/O LATE SHREEDHAR TAMULI R/O NAJIRAKHAT RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI PIN-781030 3:RAJIB JYOTI TAMULI S/O LATE SHREEDHAR TAMULI R/O NAJIRAKHAT RANGMAHAL P.O.- RANGMAHAL P.S.- CHANGSARI PIN-781030 ------------ Advocate for : MR. S BANIK Advocate for : H BORUAH (FOR CAVEATOR) appearing for BIPUL TAMULI AND 2 ORS. Page No.# 4/8 CAVT.No. 015720/26,N BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 22.05.2026 [1] Heard Mr. S. Banik, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. F. Begum, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Mr. N. Patiri, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 as well as Mr. J. Hatimuria, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. [2] This appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred by the appellants, impugning the order dated 19.02.2026, passed by the court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kamrup, Amingaon, in Misc.(J) Case No. 85/2026, in connection with Title Suit No. 68/2026, whereby the trial court granted exparte ad- interim injunction against the present appellants, while issuing notice to them and fixed the matter on 31.03.2026. [3] The learned Senior Counsel for the appellants has submitted that since while granting the exparte ad-interim injunction, the trial court fixed the Page No.# 5/8 next date, i.e., date for appearance of the present appellants and for filing written objection by them on a date which is beyond the period of 30 days, as mandated under Order 39 Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, there has been a violation of the statutory provisions and as such, he submits that as per the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of “A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu Vs. S. Chellappan And Others” reported in “(2000)7SCC 695”, such an order attains finality and same is appealable under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Hence, he submits that though the trial court is yet to hear both the parties on merit, however, the order, which has been impugned in this appeal, has attained finality and this court may also hear the appeal on merit. However, he fairly submits that if same is done by this court, the losing party may lose one forum of appeal which would be otherwise available to them, if they agitate their case before the trial court. [4] He further submits that this court in the connected interlocutory application No. 932/2026, by order dated 24.03.2026, has directed both the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property till next returnable date. Thereafter, it appears that in another connected interlocutory application, i.e., I.A.(C) No. 1435/2026, this court by its order dated 06.05.2026, Page No.# 6/8 stayed the further proceeding of Title Suit No. 68/2026, Misc.(J) Case No. 85/2026, as well as Misc.(J) Case No. 102/2026, pending before the trial court till the pendency of the instant First Appeal and both the parties were directed to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property. [5] It is pertinent to mention herein that the status order passed by this court on 06.05.2026, was agreed to by both the parties and it was a consent order. [6] On the other hand, Mr. N. Patiri, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that the respondent is agreeable to maintain status quo as was directed by this court during the pendency of the Misc.(J) Case No. 85/2026, and he prays that the matter may be remanded back to the trial court, so that trial court may after considering the contentions of both the parties dispose of the injunction application on merits. [7] After considering the submission of the learned counsel for both sides, this court is of considered opinion that in pursuant to the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of “A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu Vs. S. Chellappan And Others (supra), this court has also the jurisdiction to decide the matter on merit after hearing the rival contentions of both the sides, however, if this court chooses to do so, one of the party may lose a forum for Page No.# 7/8 appeal, which under the facts and circumstances of this case, when both the parties are agreeable to maintain status quo, does not seem further the cause of justice. [8] Accordingly, this case is remanded back to the trial court with a direction to decide the Misc. (J) Case No. 85/2026, on merit after giving an opportunity to the present appellants of filing written objection as well as also filing written statement in the connected Title Suit No. 68/2026 and written objection in Misc.(J) Case No. 102/2026. [9] The stay granted on further proceedings of above mentioned cases by this court on 06.05.2026 is, accordingly, vacated. [10] The status quo granted by this court in respect of the suit property as mentioned hereinabove shall continue till the pendency of the Misc.(J) Case No. 85/2026. [11] The learned Senior Counsel for the appellants has submitted that since the impugned order, which was passed in Misc.(J) Case No. 85/2026 has been modified by this court in the manner as described hereinabove, he prays for staying the Misc.(J) Case No. 102/2026, which is pending before the trial court, which was filed alleging violation of the exparte ad-interim injunction granted by the trial court. However, this court is of the considered opinion that since the matter has been remanded back Page No.# 8/8 to the trial court, this prayer may be made by the present appellants before the trial court itself. [12] With the above observations, this appeal is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant