Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

The State Of West Bengal & Ors vs Mala Sanyal on 22 April, 2019

Author: Abhijit Gangopadhyay

Bench: Abhijit Gangopadhyay

                                               1



       22.04.19
         Ct. 5
         ab
        cl 137

                                 M.A.T. 531 of 2017
                                         With
                                 C.A.N. 3954 of 2017
                                         With
                                 C.A.N. 4752 of 2017
                                         With
                                 C.A.N. 1154 of 2019

                           The State of West Bengal & Ors.
                                         -Vs-
                                    Mala Sanyal


Mr. Joytosh Majumder,
Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee,
Mr. Yasin Ali,
Ms. Tapati Samanta,
Mr. Somnath Naskar,
Mr. Avishek Prasad,
            ... for the appellants/applicants/petitioners

Mr. Tarun Das,
    ... for the writ petitioner/respondent/opposite party

Re: C.A.N. 3954 of 2017 (Section 5) This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal.

Heard Mr. Majumder, the learned Government Pleader for the applicants/petitioners and Mr. Das, the learned advocate for the writ petitioner/opposite party.

Mr. Das does not oppose this application and has left the matter to the discretion of the Court.

Perused the application. We are of the view that the applicants/petitioners were prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the period of limitation. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

Let the appeal be registered if it is otherwise in form.

The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act being C.A.N. 3954 of 2017 is allowed.

Re: C.A.N. 4752 of 2017 (Stay) This is an application for stay of the operation of the order impugned in the appeal.

Heard the learned advocates for the parties.

Let an affidavit-in-opposition to the application be filed within three weeks from date. Let an affidavit-in-reply thereto, if any, be filed within 10 days thereafter.

Let this application appear for hearing along with the appeal being M.A.T. 531 of 2017 in the combined monthly list of June, 2019 within the first 50 matters under that heading.

After hearing the learned advocate for the appellants/applicants, particularly in view of the pronouncements by the Apex Court as well as a Division Bench of this Court, we are of the view that the appellants/applicants have been able to make out a prima facie case for the grant of an interim order. The balance of convenience and inconvenience also lies in favour of passing an interim order inasmuch as refusal to pass an interim order shall affect the appellants/applicants more than the grant of it is likely to prejudice the writ petitioner/respondent/opposite party.

As such, there shall be stay of operation of the order impugned in the appeal for a period of 16 weeks or until further order whichever is earlier.

Re: C.A.N. 1154 of 2019 This application has been filed by the writ petitioner/opposite party praying for disposal of the appeal with the observation of the compliance of the order of the Hon'ble Single Judge.

The relief prayed for cannot be the subject matter of a separate application. In all appeals, it is the prayer of the respondents that the order appealed against may be complied with. Mr. Das, on being asked to elucidate the prayer made in the application, could not clarify the issue.

We find no reason to keep such application pending. The application being C.A.N. 1154 of 2019 is disposed of without any order.

Re: M.A.T. 531 of 2017 The appellants are directed to prepare and file the requisite number of paper books, out of Court, within six weeks.

Let this appeal appear for hearing along with C.A.N. 4752 of 2017 in the combined monthly list of June, 2019 within the first 50 matters under that heading.

(Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J.) (Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J.)