Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
7 M/S. Sandeep Constructions & Anr vs Ranjit Singh & Ors on 7 September, 2021
Author: Subhasis Dasgupta
Bench: Subhasis Dasgupta
13 07.09.
Mith 2021
un/
RKB
C.O. 1446 of 2021
Ct
07 M/s. Sandeep Constructions & Anr.
Versus
Ranjit Singh & Ors.
(Via Video conference)
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee,
Mr. Subhankar Chakraborty,
Mr. Saptarshi Bhattacharjee.
... For the Petitioners.
Mr.Ramdulal Manna,
Mr.Sanjay Chakraborti,
Ms.Saswati Ghosh Singh.
...for Opposite parties.
The Court is approached under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, soliciting a direction to ensure expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.177 of 2017, now pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division ) at Bidhannagar.
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, learned Advocate representing petitioners/defendants submits that defendant No.9 has already entered appearance in the Court below, responding to summons and thereafter has taken out an application on 5th September, 2019 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. It is contended by Mr. Banerjee that petitioners have also been suffering ad interim injunction order granted against the defendants in the original suit on 9th August, 2017. Thus, according to Mr. Banerjee, since petitioners have been suffering ad interim injunction order, that application also requires to be addressed expeditiously as possible in the interest of justice.
Mr. Ramdulal Manna, learned Advocate for the 2 opposite parties/plaintiffs submits that in this case there are 11 defendants, who are impleaded in this case, and out of which only defendant No.9 namely M/s.Sandeep Constructions has only entered his appearance, and rests of the defendants are yet to ensure their appearance in the Court below. In such context, learned Advocate for the opposite parties submits that the suit is otherwise not made ready, so as to pass a direction for expeditious disposal of the suit. However, he is fair enough to submit that he has no objection to the disposal of application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, filed by the petitioners, if the same is otherwise ready and he maintains the same stand as regards the injunction application now pending for hearing.
The Court is quite alive of the fact that due to impact of COVID-19, and its proliferation, there has been disturbance in the ordinary functioning of the Court.
Having considered the submissions of both sides, the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is required to be expeditiously disposed of. Accordingly, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Title Suit No.177 of 2017 of Bidhannagar is directed to dispose of the application under Order 7 Rule 11 either on the scheduled date fixed by the learned Court below, or if any reasons whatsoever, the same could not be done, the matter may be disposed of peremptorily within eight weeks thereafter, providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to either of the parties to this case, without granting unnecessary adjournment, unless it is extremely unavoidable.
The learned Court below must adhere to ensure expeditious disposal of temporary injunction 3 application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, if the same is otherwise ready. It is clarified that while making such exercise by the learned Court below, the plaintiffs/opposite parties must be given adequate opportunity to challenge the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC by filing written objection, if the same is not filed in the meantime.
Learned Advocate for the opposite parties/plaintiffs undertakes to file written objection against the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in the learned Court below, upon serving a copy of such objection to the petitioners or their learned Advocate, and if necessary by E-mode also, within three weeks from hence.
With these observations and directions, the revisional application stands disposed of.
(Subhasis Dasgupta, J)