Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Siddharth Gupta vs Somdeo Gupta & Others on 30 April, 2018
Author: Arijit Banerjee
Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, Arijit Banerjee
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Present:
The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya
AND
The Hon'ble Justice Arijit Banerjee
F.M.A.T. 1102 of 2017
with
CAN 9964 of 2017
Siddharth Gupta
versus
Somdeo Gupta & Others
For the Defendant No.1/Appellant : Mr. Arijit Bardhan,
Mr. Debanik Banerjee,
Mr. Anirban Roy Chowdhury.
For the Plaintiff/Respondent : Mr. Rahul Karmakar,
Ms. Gargi Goswami.
For the Defendant Nos.2 & 3/ : Mr. Debjit Mukherjee.
Proforma Respondent Nos. 2 & 3
Heard On : 30-04-2018. Judgement On : 30-04-2018.
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, A.C.J. : This first miscellaneous appeal is directed against an order being No.2 dated 18th September, 2017 passed by the learned Trial Judge in Title Suit No. 1321 of 2017. By the impugned order, the defendant nos. 1 and 3 including their men, agents and associates were restrained by an order of ad interim injunction from giving any effect to the deed of gift dated 22nd August, 2016 and also restrained from entering into suit property in any manner whatsoever fully described in the schedule 'C' of the injunction application till 30th October, 2017. The plaintiff was directed to comply with the provision of Order 39 Rule 3 (a) and (b) of Civil Procedure Code forthwith.
We are informed that the said ad interim order of injunction was extended from time to time by the learned Trial Judge and the said ad interim order of injunction is still operating. However, the orders extending the ad interim order of injunction have not been challenged by any of the parties before this Court. Since the ad interim order of injunction passed on 18th September, 2017, which is impugned in this appeal, lost its force after October 2017, no useful purpose will be served by deciding the appeal on merits at this stage. In fact, the appeal has now become infructuous in view of the subsequent extension granted by the learned Trial Judge.
We, thus, dispose of the appeal without entertaining the same. However, the learned Trial Judge is requested to dispose of the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction as well as the connected application which was filed by the defendant nos. 2 and 3 as early as possible preferably by the end of July, 2018 without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
The appeal and the application for appropriate orders being CAN 9964 of 2017 filed in connection with the appeal are, thus, disposed of.
Let the certified copy of the impugned order filed in Court today be kept with the record.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.
(JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, A.C.J.) ( ARIJIT BANERJEE, J. ) dc.