Disposed¶17

Nks Project Private Limited and Ors. v. M/S. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Calcutta HC1 Feb 2024CO/217/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal of suit; direction to trial court; Order VII Rule 11 CPC application pending despite earlier direction; ad interim injunction in favour of plaintiffs; NKS Project Private Limited v. M/s. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd.; C.O. No. 217 of 2024; two-month timeline from next date fixed; no adjournments; merits left open; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Revisional application disposed of with a direction to the learned court below to decide the Order VII Rule 11 application within two months from the next date fixed, independently and strictly in accordance with law, allowing the parties to contest and granting no unnecessary adjournments; no order as to costs; parties to act on the server copy of the order. ¶17

Nks Project Private Limited and Ors. Vs M/S. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's prayer for expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.1213 of 2022, including the long-pending application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the learned court below, should be allowed despite the objection of the plaintiffs/opposite parties.

¶10

Court's answer

The objection of the plaintiffs/opposite parties to expeditious disposal was rejected; the Court held the prayer for early disposal of the proceeding to be innocuous, since neither party stands to lose and expeditious disposal shall enure to the benefit of both parties.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The revisional application was disposed of with a direction upon the learned court below to dispose of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure within two months from the next date fixed, independently and strictly in accordance with law, upon allowing the parties to contest the proceeding, and without granting unnecessary adjournments to any party.

¶15

Key takeaways

The Court expressly clarified that it has not gone into the merits of the application; the order is confined to a direction for expeditious disposal.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil revision (C.O.) filed by the defendants/petitioners seeking expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.1213 of 2022 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 4th Court at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, where an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure remained undisposed despite an earlier direction, and the plaintiffs were enjoying an ad interim order of injunction. Rejecting the plaintiffs'/opposite parties' objection, the Court held the prayer for early disposal to be innocuous and beneficial to both sides, and directed the court below to dispose of the Order VII Rule 11 application within two months from the next date fixed, independently and strictly in accordance with law, upon allowing the parties to contest the proceeding and without unnecessary adjournments. The Court expressly did not go into the merits. No order as to costs.

¶1

01.02.2024 Sl. No.189(DL) srm

¶2

C.O. No. 217 of 2024

¶3

NKS Project Private Limited & Ors.

¶4

Versus

¶5

M/s. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd.

¶6

Mr. Sanjay Bose, Mr. Priyankar Basu Mallick

¶7

…for the Petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Srijit Chakraborty, Mr. Bimalendu Das, Mr. A. Mondal, Mr. S. Das

¶9

…for the Opposite Parties.

¶10

The petitioner prays for expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.1213 of 2022, which is pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 4^th Court at Alipore, South 24Parganas.

¶11

It is submitted that on an earlier occasion, a direction had already been issued to the learned court below to dispose of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but the same is still pending. It is submitted that the plaintiffs are enjoying an ad interim order of injunction.

¶12

Mr. Chakraborty, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of plaintiffs/opposite parties, vehemently opposes the prayer for expeditious disposal, but this Court is not inclined to

¶13

¶14

accept such objection and this Court is of the view that the prayer of the petitioner for early disposal of the proceeding, is innocuous. Neither party stands to lose if a proceeding is disposed of expeditiously. In fact, such expeditious disposal shall enure to the benefit of both the parties.

¶15

Under such circumstances, the revisional application is disposed of, with a direction upon the learned court below to dispose of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure within a period of two months from the next date fixed, independently and strictly in accordance with law, upon allowing the parties to contest the proceeding. Unnecessary adjournments shall not be granted to any of the parties.

¶16

This Court has not gone into the merits of the application.

¶17

The revisional application is, thus, disposed of.

¶18

There will be, however, no order as to costs.

¶19

Parties are to act on the basis of the server copy of this

¶20

order.

¶21

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)

Nks Project Private Limited and Ors. v. M/S. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nks Project Private Limited and Ors. v. M/S. Leonine Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palash Mondal Vs Pratap Das and Ors.

Veenavani Builders LLP and Anr. Vs Sajahan Mondal and Ors.

Aadrika Enclave LLP and Ors. Vs Sajahan Mondal and Ors.

Shalby Ltd. Vs Ohio Cardiology Associates Vt Ltd.

Praveen Kumar Baid HUF Rep by Its Karta Praveen Kumar Baid Vs S K Advertising and Co. Lvt Ltd.

Mirza Md. Sikandar Ali Begg and Ors. Vs Kaiser Md. Nadeem and Ors.