Disposed¶22

Kanan Bala Santra and Ors. v. Nimai Chand Khanra and Ors.

Calcutta HC1 Apr 2024FMA/204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court, Appellate Side, FMA 204 of 2024 with CAN 1 of 2023, Kanan Bala Santra & Ors. v. Nimai Chand Khanra & Ors., decided 01.04.2024 by Harish Tandon, J. Keywords: temporary injunction, ad interim order, partition suit, modification of interim restraint, status quo of suit premises, continuation of injunction till disposal, expedition direction (eight months), final decree.

What did the court decide?

Ad interim order of injunction dated 19.01.2024 made absolute with modification restraining all parties to the suit from changing the nature and character of the suit premises, to continue till disposal of the suit; Trial Court requested to dispose of the partition suit preferably within eight months. ¶22

Kanan Bala Santra and Ors. Vs Nimai Chand Khanra and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the ad interim order of injunction passed at the time of admission of the appeal should be extended and/or modified pending disposal of the partition suit.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The ad interim order of injunction was modified to the extent that all parties to the suit (not merely the defendants/respondents nos. 1-3) are restrained from changing the nature and character of the suit premises, bearing in mind that the suit is primarily one for partition of undivided property.

¶18

Key takeaways

The ad interim order granted on 19.01.2024 was made absolute with the above modification and to continue till the disposal of the suit, as the suit is ready for hearing and continuation would cause no prejudice to either party.ratio¶20
The Trial Court was requested to make efforts to dispose of the partition suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight months from the date of communication of the order.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Partition suit - Appeal against Trial Court's rejection of application for temporary injunction - Ad interim order dated 19.01.2024 had restrained only defendants/respondents nos. 1 to 3 from changing nature and character of suit premises - Since suit is primarily for partition of undivided property and any change may have cascading effect at final decree stage, ad interim order modified to restrain all parties to the suit from changing the nature and character of the suit premises - Ad interim order made absolute with modification and to continue till disposal of the suit - Trial Court requested to dispose of partition suit expeditiously, preferably within eight months from communication of order - Appeal (FMA 204 of 2024) and application (CAN 1 of 2023) disposed of (Harish Tandon, J.).

¶1

01.04.2024

¶2

MONDAY

¶3

Court : 04
Item : 04
Matter : FMA
Status : DO
Bench ID : 266175
Transcriber : NANDY

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

FMA 204 of 2024

¶6

with CAN 1 of 2023

¶7

Kanan Bala Santra & Ors. Vs.

¶8

Nimai Chand Khanra & Ors.

¶9

Mr. Tarasankar Samanta, Advocate

¶10

……for the Appellants

¶11

Mr. Probal Kumar Mukherjee, Senior Advocate Mr. Haridas Das, Advocate

¶12

……for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3

¶13

By consent of the learned Counsel for the parties appearing before us, the appeal and the applications are taken up together.

¶14

The instant appeal arises from an order by which an application for temporary injunction was rejected by the Trial Court. At the time of admission of the instant appeal, this Court passed an interim order restraining the defendants/respondents nos. 1, 2 and 3 from changing the nature and character of the suit premises for a limited period. The aforesaid interim order was passed on 19.01.2024 and the matter is listed today for extension of interim order.

¶15

Both the Counsel for the parties submits that since it is a partition suit, any changes that would be brought thereat, may have some cascading effect at the time of passing the final decree.

¶16

Mr. Mukherjee, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, submits that although they have been restrained from changing the nature and character of the suit premises but taking advantage of the same, the plaintiffs/appellants are also trying to change the nature and character of the suit property.

¶17

¶18

In such view of the matter and bearing in mind the nature of the suit which is primarily a partition of the undivided property, we therefore, feel that the ad interim order of injunction be modified to the extent that the parties to the suit shall be restrained from changing the nature and character of the suit premises.

¶19

Since the suit is otherwise ready for hearing as the date is fixed for framing of the issues, we feel that it would not cause any prejudice to either of the parties if the ad interim order of injunction is allowed to continue till the disposal of the suit.

¶20

Accordingly, the ad interim order granted on 19.01.2024 is made absolute with the above modification and to continue till the disposal of the suit.

¶21

The Trial Court is requested to make efforts to dispose of the partition suit as expeditiously as possible preferably within eight months from the date of communication of this order.

¶22

With these directions and observations, the appeal being FMA 204 of 2024 and the application being CAN 1 of 2023 are disposed of .

¶23

(Harish Tandon, J.)

¶24

Kanan Bala Santra and Ors. v. Nimai Chand Khanra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanan Bala Santra and Ors. v. Nimai Chand Khanra and Ors.

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

Goutam Sinha Roy Vs Kabita Singha Roy and Ors.

Sanjib Saha Vs Annapurna Neogi & Ors.

Sasthi Charan Mandal and Ors. Vs Giri Mandal and Ors.

Gouri Shankar Hazra and Anr. Vs Asraf Ali and Ors.

Afjal Khan Alias Afjal Rahaman Khan Being Rep. by Firoz Khan Vs Abdul Alam Khan

Rabindra Nath Dolai and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.