Disposed

Santi Ranjan Ghosh v. Subhas Chandra Mallick

Calcutta HC25 Feb 2022CO/991/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dispensed with service of notice to the opposite party on an application under Article 226 for expeditious disposal of an ejectment suit. The Civil Judge was directed to dispose of the suit within six months without granting any adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Dispensed with service of notice; directed subordinate court to dispose suit within six months without adjournment.

Santi Ranjan Ghosh Vs Subhas Chandra Mallick — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

25.02.2022 Ct. 21 D/L 18 ab

¶2

C.O. 991 of 2021

¶3

(Via Video Conference)

¶4

Santi Ranjan Ghosh

¶5

-Vs- Subhas Chandra Mallick

¶6

Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya, Mr. Sudip Sengupta,

¶7

... for the petitioner

¶8

Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appears for the petitioner.

¶9

Record shows that the notice of this application has not been served on the opposite party.

¶10

The petitioner by filing the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for expeditious disposal of the suit being Ejectment Suit No. 4 of 2014, pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2^nd Court at Alipore.

¶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

¶13

Having regard to the nature of relief claimed by the petitioner, being a prayer for expeditious disposal of the ejectment suit, I do not find any need to serve notice of the present application on the opposite party and it is not likely to cause any prejudice to the interest of the opposite party. Therefore, service of notice upon the opposite party is dispensed with.

¶14

The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2^nd Court at Alipore, is requested to dispose of Ejectment Suit No. 4 of 2014, as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order, without granting any adjournment whatsoever to any of the parties, as the suit is pending since 2014.

¶15

Accordingly, the revisional application being C.O. 991 of 2021 is disposed of.

¶16

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

( Kesang Doma Bhutia, J .)

Santi Ranjan Ghosh v. Subhas Chandra Mallick

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santi Ranjan Ghosh v. Subhas Chandra Mallick

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

Blue Star Engineering and Electricals Ltd. Health Care System Vs Hlg Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd.

Manju Mahato Vs Baijnath Mahato

Baijnath Mahato Vs Manju Mahato

Santi Ranjan Ghosh Vs Mohan Singh

Syed Tahseen Huq and Anr. Vs Nurul Hasan and Anr.

Profulla Kumar Ghosh Vs Joydip Das