Disposed

Abha Rani Sarkar v. Kausani Sarkar and Ors.

Calcutta HC5 Sept 2024CO/1699/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision application sought to expedite the recording of a witness's cross-examination in a pending title suit. Due to the plaintiff's old age and a prior appointment of a Commissioner, the High Court directed the trial judge to complete the recording within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing the learned Trial Judge to ensure conclusion of recording of cross-examination within three weeks.

Abha Rani Sarkar Vs Kausani Sarkar and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

05.09.2024 Item No.28 DL Ct.19 A.J.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

¶3

C.O. 1699 of 2024

¶4

Sm. Abha Rani Sarkar –Vs– Kausani Sarkar & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Shyamal Chakraborty, Mr. Debajyoti Mandal. ….for the petitioner.

¶6

The order proposed to be passed in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would not cause any prejudice to the opposite parties, as such, service of notice of the present application upon the said opposite parties is dispensed with.

¶7

The plaintiff in a suit for cancellation of a deed of gift is the petitioner of the instant application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶8

The said suit being Title Suit No.612 of 2021 is pending before the 3^rd Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Howrah.

¶9

In view of the old age of the plaintiff, her evidence has been directed to be recorded on Commission. The evidence-in-chief of the plaintiff has already been recorded, she is complaining delay in completion of recording of her cross-examination.

¶10

It appears from the record that considering the incapacity of the plaintiff to come to Court, her prayer for appointment of Commissioner for the purpose of recording her evidence was allowed on July 24, 2023, the appointment of the Commissioner would be

¶11

¶12

frustrated if the recording of her evidence is not concluded within a reasonable time.

¶13

The learned Trial Judge, therefore, is requested to ensure conclusion of recording of the crossexamination of the said witness within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶14

The petitioner is directed to send copy of this order to the opposite parties immediately.

¶15

C.O. 1699 of 2024 is disposed of with the above

¶16

terms without any order as to costs.

¶17

Photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶18

(Biswajit Basu, J.)

Abha Rani Sarkar v. Kausani Sarkar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abha Rani Sarkar v. Kausani Sarkar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Durgabala Maity Alias Durga Rani Maity and Ors. Vs Bishnu Mandir Thakurer and Ors.

Samiran Mukherjee Vs Baruna Mukherjee and Anr.

Puja Kanoi Vs Avinay Agarwal

Dipankar Biswas Vs Arndhati Biswas Nee Pal

Ruchi Bengani Vs Tarit Appliances and Equipment Pvt. Ltd.

Jyoti Tandon Vs Asha Bansal and Ors.