Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Monoranjan Mondal & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 7 March, 2019
Author: Biswanath Somadder
Bench: Biswanath Somadder
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:
The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice Biswanath Somadder And The Hon'ble Justice Arindam Mukherjee CAN 1084 of 2019 With CAN 1085 of 2019 In FMA 304 of 1976 Monoranjan Mondal & Ors.
Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the appellants/ : Mr. Amal Baran Chatterjee, Sr. Advocate,
applicants Mr. Narayan Chandra Bhandary
For the State : Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. Sougata Mitra.
Heard on : 7th March, 2019
Judgment on : 7th March, 2019.
Biswanath Somadder, ACJ. :-
In re: CAN 1084 of 2019
This is an application for the purpose of recalling of orders dated 2nd May, 2007 and 26th June, 2018, passed in FMA 304 of 1976.
This application has been filed on 31st January, 2019, i.e. after more than six months from the order dated 26th June, 2018, being the last order which is sought to be recalled in the present application.
The records reveal that the appeal was filed in the year 1975. The same was dismissed on 30th July, 2002. Subsequently, by an order dated 2nd December, 2005, the appeal was restored. On 2nd May, 2007, the appeal was again dismissed - after its restoration - since no steps were taken on behalf of the appellants. A recalling application was filed seeking recall of the order dated 2nd May, 2007. This Court has given elaborate reasons in the order dated 26th June, 2018, why the earlier application for recalling of the order dated 2nd May, 2007, could not be allowed. In order to avoid prolixity, we choose not to repeat or reiterate what had been elaborated in the earlier judgment dated 26th June, 2018. All that is required to be stated is that a lis cannot be successively brought back to life merely because a litigant has a right to file a recalling application seeking restoration after each dismissal.
The Courts have also deprecated restoration of matters after a long gap as time is precious and wasted time would never revisit, apart from the question of prejudice it might cause to the party who has been kept on tenterhooks for an indefinite period due to sheer inaction on the part of the person upon whom the obligation lies to restore a lis. During the efflux of time, newer causes would sprout up necessitating newer persons to seek legal remedy by approaching the Courts. So, a lifespan must be limited for each remedy. Unending period for launching the remedy may lead to unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy. The maxim, "interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium" (Latin), meaning that in the interest of society as a whole, litigation must come to an end, is apt and is required to be quoted in the present context. In this context, one may take notice of the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Messrs Serajuddin & Co. vs. Union of India & Ors., reported in AIR 2017 CC 1397 (CAL).
We do not find any iota of justifiable reason as to why we would entertain this recalling application, being the third successive application which the applicant has chosen to file after dismissal of the earlier applications. This is a sheer abuse of process of Court. It must be stopped here and now.
In such circumstances, the instant application for recalling is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs assessed at 3,000 GMs. However, at this juncture, on the prayer of the learned advocate for the appellant, we refrain from imposing any costs even though - as held earlier - this application is a sheer abuse of process of Court. The application for recalling the order of dismissal dated 26th June, 2018, therefore, stands dismissed without any order as to costs. Consequentially, the other application for the purpose of bringing the legal heirs of the deceased appellants on record also stands dismissed.
(Biswanath Somadder, ACJ.) I agree.
(Arindam Mukherjee, J.) sb./23