Sandip Ghosh and Anr. Vs Nemai Prosad Ghosh and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2025)

Sandip Ghosh and Anr. Vs Nemai Prosad Ghosh and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah was requested to take up hearing of the injunction application in Title Suit No.1502 of 2017 on the next date fixed (June 25, 2025), if otherwise ready, and to dispose of it expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments to either party; failing joinder of the presiding officer, the Judge-in-charge of that court to take up the hearing; no formal notice on the opposite parties, who are instead to be served with a copy of the revisional application and order by the petitioners' advocate; all parties to act on the server copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court, in exercise of Civil Revisional Jurisdiction, should request the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah to dispose of the injunction application filed in Title Suit No.1502 of 2017 expeditiously, taking up its hearing on the next date fixed (June 25, 2025).

Court's answer

CO No.1746 of 2025 is disposed of by requesting the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah to take up hearing of the injunction application on the next date fixed (June 25, 2025), if otherwise ready for hearing, and to make an endeavour to dispose of it as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party.

Ratio / Principle

If on the next date the learned presiding officer does not join (the subject court lying vacant), the learned Judge in-charge of the court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah is requested to take up the hearing of the injunction application.

Key takeaways

In view of the order sought and proposed to be passed, there is no necessity to direct issuance of notice upon the opposite parties; instead, the petitioners' advocate is obliged to serve a copy of the revisional application and the order upon the opposite parties or their advocate before the trial judge.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court at Calcutta, Civil Revisional Jurisdiction — CO No.1746 of 2025, decided 21-05-2025, before Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J. Petitioners Sandip Ghosh & Anr. (counsel: Sounak Mondal; Anirban Saha Roy), by an application under Article 227 against opposite parties Sri Nemai Prosad Ghosh & Ors., prayed for a direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah to dispose of the injunction application filed in Title Suit No.1502 of 2017 expeditiously; hearing stood fixed for June 25, 2025 per the appended order sheet. Finding no necessity for formal notice on the opposite parties, the court disposed of the application by requesting the trial court to take up the injunction hearing on the next fixed date (June 25, 2025), if otherwise ready, and to conclude it as expeditiously as possible without unnecessary adjournments; the petitioners' advocate to serve copies of the application and order on the opposite parties; if the presiding officer did not join (the subject court lying vacant), the Judge-in-charge was requested to take up the hearing. Parties to act on server copy; certified copy available on application.

21-05-2025 Item no.19 Subrata Bhattacharyya AR(C)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Civil Revisional Jurisdiction

CO No.1746 of 2025 Sandip Ghosh & Anr.

-vs-

Sri Nemai Prosad Ghosh & Ors.

Mr. Sounak Mondal

Mr. Anirban Saha Roy …for the petitioners

After some argument, Mr Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioners, prays for a direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7^th Court at Howrah to dispose of the injunction application expeditiously.

Mr Mondal submits that June 25, 2025 is fixed for hearing of the injunction application filed in Title Suit No.1502 of 2017 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7^th Court at Howrah.

In view of the order sought and proposed to be passed, there is no necessity to direct issuance of notice upon the opposite parties. However, learned advocate for the petitioners shall be obliged to serve a copy of this revisional application along with this order upon the opposite parties or upon the learned advocate representing the opposite party before the trial judge.

From the order sheet appended to this Article 227 application, it appears that June 25, 2025 is fixed for hearing of the injunction application. Mr Mondal assures this court that in the meantime the written objection to the injunction application shall be filed.

In the light of the submission made by Mr Mondal,

2

CO No.1746 of 2025 is disposed of by requesting the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7^th Court at Howrah to take up hearing of the injunction application on the next date fixed i.e. on June 25, 2025, if the same is otherwise ready for hearing, and to make an endeavour to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

Mr Mondal submits that in the meantime the subject court is lying vacant.

Hence, if on the next date learned presiding officer does not join, learned Judge in-charge of the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7^th Court at Howrah is requested to take up the hearing of the injunction application.

All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.

Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties.

[ Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J]

3