Disposed¶14

Mira Mullcik and Ors. v. Romina Sirdar

Calcutta HC15 May 2025CO/1667/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CO 1667 of 2025; Mira Mullick & Ors. vs. Romina Sirdar; Article 227 of the Constitution of India; Section 7(3) West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997; Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022; Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta; belated written statement accepted; written objection by June 18, 2025; expeditious disposal; no unnecessary adjournments; Order No. 18 dated 24th March, 2025; decided 15.05.2025; Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of without interfering with the impugned order; opposite party granted leave to file written objection to the Section 7(3) application on or before June 18, 2025 after advance service; expeditious-disposal directions issued for the Section 7(3) application and Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022. ¶14

Mira Mullcik and Ors. Vs Romina Sirdar — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order accepting the opposite party's belated written statement warrants interference in this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

The civil order is disposed of without interfering with the order impugned.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Leave is granted to the opposite party to file written objection to the application under Section 7(3) after serving an advance copy on the learned advocate for the petitioner, on or before June 18, 2025.

¶11

Key takeaways

The learned Judge, 3rd Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court is requested to take up the hearing of the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act on the next date fixed, if otherwise ready, and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible without unnecessary adjournments to either party.ratio¶14
After disposal of the interlocutory applications, the learned Trial Judge shall endeavour to see that Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022 is disposed of as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Article 227 petition by plaintiffs in Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022 challenging Order No. 18 dated 24th March, 2025 of the learned Chief Judge, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta, whereby the opposite party's written statement filed at a belated stage was accepted. Held: petition disposed of without interfering with the impugned order; opposite party permitted to file written objection to the pending application under S. 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 on or before June 18, 2025 after serving an advance copy; learned Judge, 3rd Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court requested to take up the Section 7(3) application on the next date fixed, if otherwise ready, and dispose of it expeditiously; Trial Judge to endeavour expeditious disposal of the ejectment suit, in each case without unnecessary adjournments to either party. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

¶1

15.05.25 21 Ct. No. 06 Sws.M

¶2

CO 1667 of 2025

¶3

Mira Mullick & Ors.

¶4

vs. Romina Sirdar

¶5

Mr. Chanchal Kumar Dutta Ms. Krishna Mullick

¶6

….for the Petitioners Mr. Rajesh Upadhyay Ms. Surabita Biswas

¶7

….for the opposite party

¶8

This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against an order being No. 18 dated 24^th March, 2025 passed by the learned Chief Judge, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022.

¶9

By the order impugned the written statement filed by the opposite party herein at a belated stage was accepted. After some argument, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners prays for a direction upon the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the application under Section 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 and the suit expeditiously.

¶10

On a query of the Court, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that no written objection to the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act has yet been filed. He prays for time to file written objection to the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act.

¶11

On the prayer made by the learned advocate for the opposite party herein, leave is granted to the opposite party to file written objection after serving an advance

¶12

¶13

copy of the same to the learned advocate for the petitioner on or before June 18, 2025.

¶14

In the light of the submissions made by learned advocate for the petitioner CO 1667 of 2025 is disposed of without interfering with the order impugned but by requesting the learned Judge, 3^rd Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court to take up a hearing of the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act on the next date fixed, if the same is otherwise ready for hearing and to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶15

After disposal of the interlocutory applications, the learned Trial Judge shall make an endeavor to see that the Ejectment Suit No. 267 of 2022 is disposed of as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶16

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

¶17

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Mira Mullcik and Ors. v. Romina Sirdar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mira Mullcik and Ors. v. Romina Sirdar

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

M/S Bildrite Construction Co. Vs Howrah Municipal Corporation

Ashis Kr Dey Vs Milan Dey and Ors.

Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata Formerly Known as Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata Vs Bhagirath Kejriwal and Ors.

Maya Naskar and Anr. Vs Rabin Naskar and Anr.

Om Prakash Shaw Vs M/S Sumrittrading India Pvt. Ltd.

Dr Indrajit Das Vs Sristi Majumdar