Namita Harbab v. Chandi Bala Ghosh
Case brief
What is this about?
Revisional application challenging the acceptance of a written statement with a counter claim signed by non-parties. The single-judge court held the acceptance unsustainable without reasons and set it aside.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order rejecting the challenge is set aside with liberty to file fresh written statement by defendant or authorised party within ten days.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
20 10.11. 2022 AGM /RK B Ct 07
C.O. 2261 of 2022
Smt. Namita Harbab Vs
Smt. Chandi Bala Ghosh
Mr. Ranjan Kumar Kali, Mr. Diganta Das, Ms. Avipriya Bose,
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Kishore Mukherjee, … For the opposite party.
The subject matter of challenge in this case is against the acceptance of a written statement filed by the defendant containing counter claim beyond the stipulated period of time, and that too, furnished by some of the persons, who are neither impleaded as defendants in this case, nor a constituted power of attorney of impleaded defendant.
Admittedly, this is a suit for declaration of tenancy right, where Smt Chandi Bala Ghosh is impleaded as defendant.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the written statement containing counter claim has been furnished by three sons of the original defendant, who are not parties to this case, though the affidavit has been sworn by the constituted power of attorney for the defendant.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a written statement containing counter claim signed by persons not impleaded as defendants and lacking independent sanction from the defendant can be accepted.
Whether a lower court order accepting such a document without assigning reasons is sustainable.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Smt. Namita Harbab
- respondent
Smt. Chandi Bala Ghosh
Coram
Subhasis Dasgupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Calcutta HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- CO/2261/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court