Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Bhola Nath Kundu vs Radhashyam Gupta on 2 August, 2018

1 Sl. August 29,

66. 2018 High Court at Calcutta Revisional Jurisdiction C.O. 2820 of 2018 Bhola Nath Kundu Versus Radhashyam Gupta Mr. Abhijit Ray, ...for the petitioner.

It is submitted by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, who is the decree holder in an eviction suit, that the executing court acted without jurisdiction in refusing to fix a date for hearing of the petitioner's application under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and Orders, framed by this court, on a hypertechnical ground that the said application was in the nature of an application under Order XXI, Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The executing court went further to hold that since there was no provision for registering an application under Rule 208 as a miscellaneous case, no date could be fixed for hearing of such application.

The reasoning so furnished by the executing court is absurd and virtually amounted to pre-judging the application under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and Orders, which is not permissible in law.

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, no prior service of notice of this revisional application on the opposite party is deemed necessary.

Accordingly, C.O. 2820 of 2018 is disposed of by directing the Judge, Third Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta, to dispose of the application under Rule 208 of the Civil Rules and Orders filed by the decree holder/petitioner in Ejectment Execution Case No. 61 of 2018, pending 2 in the said court, as expeditiously as possible upon fixing a date for hearing of the same, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. The said application shall be mandatorily disposed of within a month from the date of communication of this order to the executing court.

There will be no order as to costs.

The petitioner shall communicate this order to the court below as well as to the judgment debtor/opposite party and/or the learned advocate for opposite party appearing in the executing court below at the earliest.

( Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. ) Dns