In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Bank of Baroda, has questioned legality and correctness of order dated 24.08.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Tinsukia, in Title Suit No. 24 of 2011. By that order the learned trial court rejected application filed by the respondents under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

[2] The opposite parties No.1 & 2, as plaintiffs, instituted Title Suit No. 24 of 2011 praying for declaration, inter alia, that creation of guarantee document dated 28.01.2011 and equitable mortgage relating to loan account of M/s. ARK Group is a fraudulent act and that it is neither binding on the plaintiffs nor is the defendant No.1 entitled to enforce the same against the plaintiffs towards financial aid granted to M/s ARK Group. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is that in the year 2009 the plaintiffs along with defendant No.2 decided to establish a business of Restaurant-cum-Bar at Tinsukia. Pursuant to this, they purchased a plot of land measuring 1279.25 sq. ft. at A.T. Road, Tinsukia vide Registered Sale deed No. 1790 of 2009 at consideration of Rs.2,50,000/-. Then the defendant No.2 p