ORDER

26.09.2023 Date :

Mr. W. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that they are no longer appearing in the matter. The Court cannot take cognizance of this submission as it was the duty of the learned counsel to produce a proof that a written notice was served to the petitioner regarding their intention to withdraw from the case, which has not been done. Accordingly, the present set of counsel continues to remain on record even if they choose not to address the Court.

2. This matter being a revision of the matter of the year 2013, the Court is inclined to proceed with the matter without the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. By the impugned order dated 05.01.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Misc.(J) Case No. 2/2011 in the proceedings of TS 21/2009, the said learned trial Court took up for adjudication of an application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC for review of the judgment and order dated 06.12.2010 passed by the said learned Court in TS 21/2009, by which the suit of the petitioner-plaintiff was dismissed.

4. It appears from the LCR that the prayer in the suit is for (1) decree of decl