The High Court observed that an appeal against an Order XXXIX rule order was incorrectly classified as MAT and belongs before the District Judge. The MAT was dismissed with liberty to approach the District Judge.
MAT dismissed; liberty to prefer appeal before concerned District Judge.
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.
03 21.09.2023
mb In the High Court at Calcutta In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri
MAT 125 of 2023 with C.A.N. 1 of 2023
Shyamal Ghosh
-Vs.-
Jhatkan Singha
Dr. Navin Barik,
Ms. Esha Acharya
…for the appellant
Mr. Subham Ghosh, Mr. Mayank Roy
…for the respondent
concerned Section.
2
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)
(Uday Kumar, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal preferred against an order under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC should be filed in MAT or before the District Judge.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shyamal Ghosh
Jhatkan Singha
Dr. Navin Barik
Ms. Esha Acharya
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
Uday Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
