NEELOM OSWAL (JAIN) (ACTUAL NAME IS SMT NEELAM CHANDALIA) v. RAJ KUMAR KEJRIWAL & Ors.

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

09.01.2026 ORDER Page No.# 3/9

1. Heard Mr. R.K. Mour, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Alam, the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This appeal under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the applicant impugning the order dated 22.06.2023, 06.07.2023 and

11.08.2023, passed by the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Title Suit No. 151/2020, whereby the prayer for calling of the Misc. (N.J.) case records from the Office of the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 was rejected by the trial court and suit was fixed for examination of defendant’s witnesses.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had prayed for calling of following Misc. (N.J.) Cases from the Office of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 in the aforementioned Title Suit to show that he has been depositing rent in court from the month of May 2020 to April 2022. Sl.No. Period Deposited in Misc.(N.J.) Case No. Amounts Page No.# 4/9 May 2020 to October 2020 November, 2020 6063/2020 Rs. 23,700/- i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. xv. xvi. November, 2020 December, 2020 6690/2020 December, 2020 January, 2021 January, 2021 February, 2021 March, 2021 April, 2021 May, 2021 June, 2021 July, 2021 February, 2021 March, 2021 April, 2021 May, 2021 June, 2021 July, 2021 August 2021 August 2021 September 2021 7135/2021 September 2021 November 2021 7934/2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 January 2022 November 2021 8700/2021 December 2021 January 2022 February 2022 xvii. February 2022 March 2022 xviii. March 2022 xix. April, 2022 April, 2022 May, 2022 Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/- Rs. 3950/-

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial court had initially allowed the prayer of the petitioner to call for the aforesaid (N.J.) Cases. However, in respect of the some of the (N.J.) Cases, the petitioner failed to take steps. Thereafter, by order dated

18.05.2023, the trial court again granted one more chance to the present petitioner to take steps for calling of the (N.J.) Cases by depositing a cost of Rs. 500/- to the plaintiffs (respondents). The next date of the case was fixed Page No.# 5/9 on 22.06.2023. On the said date again, the petitioner was allowed to take fresh steps for calling of the aforesaid (N.J.) Cases with imposition of cost of Rs. 500/-.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 22.06.2023 was not uploaded in full in the e-court website and it was reflected only and the next date was shown in the e-court website as for DWs/(N.J.) records and therefore, the petitioner could not take steps on that day.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on 11.08.2023, the petitioner again filed an application before the trial court which was numbered as Petition No. 1373/2023 whereby, he prayed for allowing the petitioner to take fresh steps for calling of the (N.J.) Cases which were not received by the court and mention about which was made by the petitioner in his earlier Petition No. 675/2022.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the aforesaid application the petitioner also sought leave of the court to allow the defendant to exhibit the (N.J.) Cases by filing an additional affidavit as she had already filed her evidence on affidavit in the said case. However, by the order dated 11.08.2023, the trial court, after considering the fact that even after directions of the trial court to the present petitioner to take steps for Page No.# 6/9 issuance of reminder for calling of the (N.J.) Case records, no records were received till that day, the prayer for calling of (N.J.) Case records was rejected and the next date of the case was fixed for examination of defendant’s witness on

14.09.2023.

8. By the aforesaid order, the trial court also declined to consider the plea of the petitioner that as the complete order of the court was not uploaded in the e-court website, she could not take steps immediately.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has taken steps for calling of the aforementioned Misc. (N.J.) Cases as directed by the court. However, when the Office of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 failed to send those Misc. (N.J.) Cases to the trial court as per the requisition, it was incumbent on the trial court to show-cause the Office of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 as the petitioner has no role in the same.

10. He further submits that if the petitioner is denied the opportunity of exhibiting the aforesaid Misc. (N.J.) Cases in the pending trial before the trial court, she would be highly prejudiced.

11. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the Title Suit No. 151/2020 Page No.# 7/9 is an eviction suit and the petitioner, who is the tenant and is in occupation of the suit premises, is intentionally protracting the trial. He submits that since 08.06.2022, the trial has not proceeded any further mainly due to calling of the aforesaid Misc. (N.J.) Cases. He submits that impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity so as to call for any interference by this court.

12. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials on record.

13. on perusal of the records, it appears that the Title Suit No. 151/2020 which is an eviction suit filed by the present respondents is not progressing any further since

08.06.2022 only because of the non-production of 19 numbers of Misc. (N.J.) Cases which was called for by the trial court on filing of the Petition No. 675/2022 by the present petitioner.

14. Though, it appears that the petitioner was also at fault in belatedly taking steps for calling of the aforesaid Misc. (N.J.) Cases, however, once such steps were taken and requisition was made by the trial court to the Office of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, it was incumbent on the said Office to send those Misc. (N.J.) Cases to the trial court in connection with Title Suit No. 151/2020. The said office is bound to comply with the Page No.# 8/9 requisition made by the court.

15. Considering the issue involved in this revision petition, without delving deep into the merit of the respective submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, this court is of considered opinion that under the facts and circumstances of this case, the ends of justice would be served if the petitioner may be given an opportunity of exhibiting the aforementioned Misc. (N.J.) Cases in her defence in the aforesaid Title Suit.

16. Hence, as from records it appears that the steps for calling of the aforesaid Misc. (N.J.) Cases were already taken by the petitioner, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 Kamrup(M) is directed to ensure that the Office of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 shall send the above mentioned 19 numbers of the records of Misc. (N.J.) Cases to the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in connection with Title Suit No. 151/2020 without fail on or before 30th March, 2026.

17. The court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4 Kamrup(M) shall thereafter bring the Title Suit No. 151/2020 to its logical conclusion.

18. Let a copy of this order be sent by the Registry to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1 Page No.# 9/9 Kamrup(M)and the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4 Kamrup(M) for doing the needful.

19. With above directions, this civil revision petition (I/O) is disposed of. Comparing Assistant JUDGE