1. Heard Mr. P.C. Dey, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. R.K. Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Mr. N. Bharali, the learned Counsel for the respondents No.11 to 14. None appears on call for the other respondents No. 5, 7 and 10, whose counsels had entered appearance by filing vakalatnama. None appears for remaining respondents No. 1, 2, 4, 8 and 9, although notices have been duly served on them.

2. In challenge in this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is the order dated 23.05.2016 passed by the Court of the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (Metropolitan), Guwahati in Misc. (J) Case No. 554/2016, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner–plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC.

3. The petitioner-plaintiff had originally instituted the said suit against the respondents No. 10 herein, out of which the respondents No.1 to 8 were arrayed as Defendants No.1 to 8 and the respondents No. 9 and 10 herein were arrayed as Proforma Defendants. The following reliefs were prayed in the plaint:-

(i) A decree for declaring that the revocation of Power-of-Attorney No. 1532/2002 dated 02.04.2002 vide Revocation