CRP 427/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. KP Sarma, learned senior counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners have filed the present application under Article 227 of the Cons titution of India challenging the order dated 15th November, 2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Goalpara in Misc. (Appeal) No.7/2011, whereby and whereunde r while admitting the appeal preferred by the present respondents, against the o rder dated 19th September, 2011 passed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Goalpara in Misc. (J) Case No.21/2010 arising out of Title Suit No.24/2010 granting injuncti on, the said order dated 19th September, 2010 has been stayed. Mr. Sarma, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned M unsiff vide order dated 19th September, 2011, by reasoned order and upon hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on appreciation of evidences recor ded in the matter of the petition filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 granted the injunction as prayed for by the present petitioners, who are the plaintiffs in Title Suit No.24/2010, which has been stayed by the learned Appellate Court, eve n without assigning any reason. According to Mr. Sarma, since the order dated 1 9th September, 2011 was passed upon hearing both the parties, the learned Appell ate Court ought not to have passed the ex-parte order. It appears that the learned Munsiff upon hearing the learned counsel for the par ties and upon consideration of the evidences adduced by the parties, both oral a nd documentary, on the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC passed the order dated 19th September, 2011 granting the injunction. The present resp ondents being aggrieved by the said order preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Court being Misc. (Appeal) No.7/2011, which was admitted vide order d ated 15th November, 2011. The learned Appellate Court has also passed an order staying the operation of the order dated 19th September, 2011 till disposal of t he appeal or until further order without, however, recording any reason therefor . By the said order, the next date was fixed on 28th November, 2011. The petiti oners also, in the meantime, received the notice in the said appellate proceedin g. Since an ex-parte order has been passed by the learned Court below, it has to consider the application that may be filed by the present petitioners for vacat ing the said ex-parte order. That being the position, the present revision petition is disposed of allowing t he petitioners to file appropriate application before the learned Appellate Cour t seeking vacation of the interim order passed on 15th November, 2011 and in the event of filing such application, the same shall be heard and disposed of withi n 10(ten) days of filing such application. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.