Disposed

Rajeev Shaw v. Sambhu Nath Shaw Since Deceased Rep. by His Legal Hiers Rajshree Jaiswal and Ors.

Calcutta HC10 Mar 2022CO/464/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition under Article 226 addressed delay caused by unnecessary adjournments in a Title Suit. The High Court dispensed with notice and directed the trial court to dispose of the application within one month without adjournments.

What did the court decide?

The revisional application disposed of; directions issued to the learned Civil Judge to decide the application within one month without adjournment.

Rajeev Shaw Vs Sambhu Nath Shaw Since… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

10.03.2022 Ct. 21 D/L 165 ab

¶2

C.O. 464 of 2022

¶3

(Via Video Conference)

¶4

Rajeev Shaw

¶5

-Vs-

¶6

Sri Sambhu Nath Shaw since deceased legal heirs, Smt. Rajshree Jaiswal & Ors.

¶7

Mr. Shubham Gupta, Mr. Tanmoy Kumar Dey,

¶8

... for the petitioner

¶9

Mr. Shubham Gupta,, learned advocate appears for the petitioner.

¶10

The petitioner by filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for expeditious disposal of the application filed under Order 40 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in connection with Title Suit No. 9 of 17, pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Sealdah.

¶11

The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the learned Court below has been granting unnecessary adjournments and due to which, there is a delay in disposal of the case and such delay is causing hardship to the petitioner.

¶12

Having regard to the nature of relief claimed by the petitioner, being a prayer for expeditious disposal of

¶13

¶14

the interlocutory application, I do not find any need to serve notice of the present application on the opposite parties and it is not likely to cause any prejudice to the interest of the opposite parties. Therefore, service of notice upon the opposite parties is dispensed with.

¶15

The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Sealdah, is requested to dispose of the application filed under Order 40 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in connection with Title Suit No. 9 of 17, as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order, without granting any adjournment whatsoever to any of the parties.

¶16

In the event, the regular Court is vacant or absent, then whoever in charge of the Court shall hear the matter.

¶17

Accordingly, the revisional application being C.O. 464 of 2022 is disposed of.

¶18

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

Parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all formalities.

¶21

( Kesang Doma Bhutia, J .)

¶22

Rajeev Shaw v. Sambhu Nath Shaw Since Deceased Rep. by His Legal Hiers Rajshree Jaiswal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Shaw v. Sambhu Nath Shaw Since Deceased Rep. by His Legal Hiers Rajshree Jaiswal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tasmith Jewellers Vs Voylla Fashions Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Clyde Stores Pvt. Ltd. Vs Arun Kumar Gupta & Ors.

Piyali Tewari Dey Vs Baidyanath Dey and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Sinha Vs Thakur Singh

Prajapati Pandit Vs Jiban Krishna Jana & Ors.

Sk. Boldo @ Sk. Abdul Rasid Vs Morjina Begum