The High Court, by consent of parties, disposed of an appeal and application by confirming an interim order restraining respondents from alienating suit property for four weeks, until the disposal of a pending injunction application.
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.
FMA 225 of 2022 CAN 1 of 2021
Ct. 8
Smt. Sudipta Sankar Bose Versus Gobinda Ghosal & Ors.
Mr. Debnath Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Sarosij Dasgupta, Adv. Mr. Avijit Dey, Adv. Mr. S. Mitra, Adv.
…for the appellant
Mr. Supratim Laha, Adv. Mr. Gopal Das, Adv. Mr. Sourav Jana, Adv. …for the respondent nos.1-4 Mr. P.S. Mullick, Adv.
…for the respondent no.5
By consent of the parties, the appeal and the application are treated as on day’s list and disposed of by confirming the order dated 23rd March, 2022 by which the respondents were restrained from alienating the suit property for a period of four weeks.
The said interim order stands confirmed and shall continue till the disposal of the injunction application pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Sealdah.
The learned Trial Judge is requested to dispose of the injunction application as expeditiously as possible.
The appeal and the application are, accordingly, disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
2
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
Smt. Sudipta Sankar Bose
Gobinda Ghosal
Ors.
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
Soumen Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
