Disposed¶19

Susmita Chowdhury v. Uttam Mihir Roy and Anr.

Calcutta HC13 Mar 2024CO/3398/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

alimony pendente lite; money execution case; expeditious disposal; ex parte order; application to vacate ex parte order; Additional District Judge 5th Court Howrah; matrimonial suit; CO 3398 of 2023; CO 166 of 2023; Rs. 42,40,000 due; Rs. 10,00,000 paid; no adjournment assurance; Hiranmay Bhattacharyya; disposed with directions; no costs.

What did the court decide?

CO 3398 of 2023 disposed of with directions to the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Howrah to hear the application for vacating the ex parte order dated 22.12.2021 on 16.03.2024 and dispose of it preferably within four weeks from the next date fixed; further steps in the money execution case depending on its fate; no order as to costs. ¶19

Susmita Chowdhury Vs Uttam Mihir Roy and Anr. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue to the court below for expeditious disposal of Money Execution Case No. 13 of 2022, and whether the pending application to vacate the ex parte order dated 22.12.2021 should be heard first.

¶9

Court's answer

Since the opposite party has prayed for vacating the very order sought to be executed in the Money Execution Case, the application for vacating the ex parte order is to be heard first.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Howrah was requested to take up the hearing of the vacation application on the next date fixed (16.03.2024) and dispose of it expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from the next date fixed.

¶17

Key takeaways

Depending on the fate of the vacation application, the learned Judge of the court below shall make an endeavour to take further steps in connection with the money execution case.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

SUSMITA CHOWDHURY v. UTTAM MIHIR ROY & ANR. (CO 3398 of 2023, decided 13.03.2024, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.): The petitioner-wife sought expeditious disposal of Money Execution Case No. 13 of 2022 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Howrah, filed to execute an ex parte order dated 22.12.2021 passed in a misc. case arising out of a matrimonial suit for alimony pendente lite; counsel stated Rs. 42,40,000/- was due. The husband-opposite party had applied to vacate the ex parte order and had paid Rs. 10,00,000/- pursuant to the order dated 31.03.2023 in CO 166 of 2023. Holding that the application for vacating the ex parte order must be heard first, the Court requested the trial court to take it up on 16.03.2024 and dispose of it preferably within four weeks, with further steps in the execution case depending on its fate. CO disposed of; no order as to costs.

¶1

13.03.2024 Item No.21 gd/ssd

¶2

CO/3398/2023 SUSMITA CHOWDHURY VS UTTAM MIHIR ROY & ANR.

¶3

Mr. Rohit Banerjee, Mr. Prabir Bhattacharya ..for the petitioner.

¶4

Mr. Debabrata Acharyya, Mr. Sital Samanta ..for the Opposite party no.1. . Ms. Neelina Chatterjee, Ms. Sudha Singh ..for the Opposite party no.2.

¶5

This is an application for expeditious disposal of a Money Execution Case No.13 of 2022 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, 5^th Court, Howrah. The said money execution case was filed for executing the order dated 22.12.2021.

¶6

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the husband/opposite party herein has not complied with the directions passed by the learned court below for payment of alimony pendente lite. He, upon instructions from his client, submits that as on date a sum of Rs.42,40,000/- is due and payable by the opposite party-husband pursuant to

¶7

¶8

the order passed on 22^nd December, 2021 in a misc. case arising out of the matrimonial suit.

¶9

He, therefore, submits that a direction is to be passed upon the learned Judge of the court below to dispose of the money execution case expeditiously.

¶10

Learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party no.1 submits that prior to the hearing of the money execution case, the application filed by the husband-opposite party herein for vacating the ex parte order dated 22nd December, 2021 is to be heard out. He further submits that pursuant to a direction contained in the order dated 31^st March, 2023 passed in CO 166 of 2023, the husbandopposite party herein has paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the wife within time limit specified in the said order.

¶11

Heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perused the materials placed.

¶12

It is not in dispute that the money execution case was filed for executing the order passed on 22^nd December, 2021. The opposite party herein has taken out an application for vacating the ex parte order dated 22^nd December, 2021 and also complied with the directions contained in the order dated 31^st March, 2023 in CO 166 of 2023 by paying a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the wife-petitioner herein within the time limit mentioned in the said order. Since the

¶13

¶14

opposite party herein has prayed for vacating the order which is sought to be executed by the petitioner by way of Money Execution Case, this Court is of the considered view that the application for vacating the ex parte order is to be heard first.

¶15

It has been uniformly submitted by the learned Advocates for the respective parties that 16^th March, 2024 has been fixed for hearing of the application for vacating the ex parte order.

¶16

The learned Advocates for the respective parties assures this Court that no adjournment shall be taken by the respective parties on the next date fixed i.e. on 16^th March, 2024.

¶17

In view of the assurances given by the learned Advocates of the respective parties upon instructions from their respective clients, this Court requests the leaned Additional District Judge, 5^th Court at Howrah to take up the hearing of the application for vacating the ex parte order dated 22^nd December, 2021 on the next date fixed i.e. on 16^th March, 2024 and to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible but preferably within a period of four weeks from the next date fixed. Depending on the fate of such application, the learned Judge of the court below shall make an endeavour to take further steps in connection with the money execution case.

¶18

¶19

With the above observations and directions CO 3398 of 2023 stands disposed of.

¶20

There will be no order as to costs.

¶21

Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties on usual formalities.

¶22

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

Susmita Chowdhury v. Uttam Mihir Roy and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susmita Chowdhury v. Uttam Mihir Roy and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sakkshi Gopal Majumdar Vs State

Ashok Kr. Maji Vs State

Atish Kumar Manna Vs State of W.B.

Nabendu Sengupta Vs National Jute Board and Ors.

Nabanita Ganguly and Anr. Vs Shyam Karmakar

Smt. Swagata Swarnakar Maity Vs Sri Sourav Maity