Appellate courts should not interfere with a trial court's discretionary grant of an ex-parte ad interim injunction unless the order is shown to be arbitrary, capricious, or perverse. Procedural defects in an appeal memo that do not impact the merits are considered curable and not fatal to the appeal.

JUDGMENT :

Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.

1. Heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. Gautam, the learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. Though, notices on the other respondents were duly served, however, none has appeared on their behalf, when the matter was called on for hearing. Hence, this Court decided to proceed ex-parte against them.

2. This appeal under Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by the appellants, namely, (1) Asomiya Pratidin, (2) Sri Jayanta Baruah and (3) Sri Jatin Choudhury, impugning the order dated 11.02.2026, passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 1, Kamrup (M) in Misc (J) Case No. 156/2026 in connection with the Title Suit No. 85/2026, whereby, ex-parte ad interim injunction was granted in favour of the present respondent No. 1 by injuncting the present appellants from making, publishing, circulating or disseminating any further defamatory statements or materials concerning the present respondent No. 1 with regard to the news items published, on 05.02.2026, in the Assamese daily newspaper, Asomiya Pratidin, which were captioned as “ RAAJYAT NAAME-BENAAME SAMPATTI KROY – MUKHYA MANTRIR PARIYAALOR 12 HEJAAR BIGHAA BHUMI”, and (ii) “ HIMANTA BISWA KAARO NAHAY JAARE GHANISTHA HOICHE, TAREI PITHIT CHURI BAHUAAICHE”.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are that the present respondent No. 1, namely, Dr. Himanta Biswa Sarma had filed a Title Suit bearing Title Suit No. 85/2026, before the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati against the present appellants and three other persons, namely, (1) Sri Gaurav Gogoi, (2) Sri Jitendra Singh and (3) Sri Bhupesh Baghel (who are arrayed as respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4 respectively in the instant appeal).

4. In the said suit, the present respondent No. 1 has prayed for a declaration that the news items mentioned hereinbefore, which were published in the newspaper Asomiya Pratidin on 05.02.2026 are defamatory and has harmed the name, fame, reputation, goodwill and future prospects of the present respondent No. 1. The present respondent No. 1 has also prayed for a compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Hundred Crores) for the damage done by the respondents to his reputation. The relief of permanent prohibitory injunction has also been prayed for restraining the present appellants and other defendants from making any statement, printing, publishing, circulating or disseminating any news items in furtherance of the above- mentioned news items. The respondent No. 1 has also prayed for a relief of permanent mandatory injunction by directing the present appellants to publish clarification and apology in connection with the aforesaid news items published in the Asomiya Pratidin Newspaper on 05.02.2026.

5. It is also averred by the present respondent No.1, in the plaint filed by him, before the Trial Court, in the Title Suit No. 85/2026, that on 14^th February 2026, the present appellant published two news i