Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Madhusudan Das vs Rina Roy & Anr on 5 June, 2017
Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
AND
The Hon'ble Justice Asha Arora
F.M.A.T. 870 of 2016
(CAN 8981 of 2016)
Madhusudan Das
-versus-
Rina Roy & Anr.
For the Appellant : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Jaiswal.
Heard On : 5th June, 2017.
Judgement On : 5th June, 2017.
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.
In a suit for partition in respect of 'C' schedule property, filed by the plaintiff, the learned Trial Judge passed an ad-interim order of injunction on the prayer of the plaintiff directing the parties to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit property after holding that the plaintiff and the defendants are co-sharers in respect of the 'C' schedule property.
The defendant appeared in the said suit and filed objection to the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction.
After considering the claims of the respective parties, the learned Trial Judge disposed of the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction by making the ad-interim order of status-quo absolute.
The legality of the said judgment and/or order is under challenge in this First Miscellaneous Appeal at the instance of the defendant/appellant.
When the learned Trial Judge after holding that the suit property being 'C' schedule property still remains unpartitioned and the plaintiff and the defendants are co-sharers thereof, we, sitting in this jurisdiction, do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order in this appeal.
Accordingly, we decline to admit this appeal.
We are informed by the learned counsel appearing for the defendant that his client has already filed written statement in the suit. Thus, the pleadings of the parties are complete.
We, thus, request the learned Trial Judge to make utmost endeavour to dispose of the said suit as early as possible, but preferably within six months, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
The appeal is, thus, disposed of. Consequently, the application filed in connection with this appeal is also disposed of.
(Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.) (Asha Arora, J.) ac 1 2