Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010287722018 2026:GAU-AS:7905 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/7/2019 DILEN BARMAN AND 2 ORS. S/O- LATE DINANATH BARMAN, R/O- VILL- GOMURA, MOUZA- HASTINAPUR, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301 2: HIMANGSHU BARMAN S/O- LATE DINANATH BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA- HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 3: KIRON BARMAN D/O- LATE DINANATH BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA- HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 78130 VERSUS SMT. JAMINI BARMAN AND 10 ORS. W/O- LATE SARAT BARMAN, R/O- VILL- GOMURA, MOUZA -HASTINAPUR, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301 2:KRISHNA BARMAN D/O- LATE SARAT BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 Page No.# 2/4 3:SURAJIT BARMAN S/O- LATE SARAT BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 4:GITARTHA BARMAN S/O- LATE SARAT BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 5:HRIDAYA BARMAN S/O- LATE SARAT BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 6:SAJANI BARMAN W/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 7:PHULEN BARMAN S/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 8:AMALESH BARMAN S/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 Page No.# 3/4 9:MANJIT BARMAN S/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 10:UZZAL BARMAN S/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 11:MANJULA BARMAN D/O- LATE RAJANI BARMAN R/O- VILL- GOMURA MOUZA -HASTINAPUR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 78130 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P CHOUDHURY, MR. A S DHILLON,MR K SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : MS. B CHOUDHURY, MR P K BASU,MR. N SARKAR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA ORDER Date : 05.06.2026 There is no representation from the petitioners. However, Mrs. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 10 is present. 2. The petitioners remained unrepresented when the matter was previously listed and called on 04.08.2025 and 29.08.2025. Accordingly, this Court by order dated 29.08.2025 had recorded that if on the next date, none Page No.# 4/4 appears for the petitioners on call, appropriate orders would be passed. 3. The learned counsel for the appearing respondents has submitted by referring to the plaint of T.S. No. 15/1997 that plaintiff No. 1 in the said suit is Sri Sarat Barman. It is submitted that plaintiff No. 1 is still alive, but by falsely indicating in the cause title that Sarat Barman is deceased, he has been illegally substituted by respondent Nos. 1 to 5. The respondent No. 1 is shown as the wife of late Sarat Barman, respondent No. 2 as the daughter of late Sarat Barman, respondent No. 3, 4 and 5 as the sons of late Sarat Barman. 4. It is submitted that the plaintiff No. 1 is still alive. Therefore, not only the present revision bad for non-joinder of necessary parties, but it is also bad for mis-joinder of respondent Nos. 1 to 5 as legal representatives of a person who is still alive. 5. We find force in the submissions of the learned counsel for the appearing respondents. 6. Be that as it may, as the petitioners are absent on call on the 3rd consecutive dates, this petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. 7. Accordingly, the appearing respondents are at liberty to produce a certified copy of this order before the concerned Court so as to bring this order to the notice of the said Court. JUDGE Comparing Assistant