Disposed¶11

Chinu Rani Paul v. Subhajit Paul

Calcutta HC17 Jun 2025CO/208/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious hearing / early disposal of civil suit; injunction application possibly pending, fixed for hearing on 23rd April 2025; Title Suit No.231 of 2018, Civil Judge (Junior Division), Barrackpore; request to Trial Judge to avoid unnecessary adjournments; no notice to opposite party required; petitioner absent despite urgent mention; C.O. 208 of 2025 disposed of; no order as to costs; certified photocopy on usual formalities.

What did the court decide?

Request/direction to the trial court: the injunction application, if still pending, to be heard on the next date fixed, and Title Suit No.231 of 2018 to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible without unnecessary adjournments; no order as to costs; urgent certified photocopy to be supplied on usual formalities. ¶11

Chinu Rani Paul Vs Subhajit Paul — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should issue for expeditious hearing of the (possibly pending) injunction application and expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.231 of 2018 before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Barrackpore.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

No notice upon the opposite party was necessary, in view of the order sought and proposed to be passed.

¶7

Key takeaways

If the injunction application is still pending, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Barrackpore is requested to take up its hearing on the next date fixed and endeavour to secure expeditious disposal of Title Suit No.231 of 2018.ratio¶8
After disposal of the connected applications, the learned Trial Judge is requested to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

C.O. 208 of 2025, an application for expeditious hearing of Title Suit No.231 of 2018 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Barrackpore, was disposed of. Although the matter had been mentioned citing urgency, none appeared for the petitioner and no accommodation was sought. The Court held there was no necessity to issue notice upon the opposite party in view of the order proposed. Finding from the appended order-sheets that 23rd April, 2025 was fixed for hearing of the injunction application, the Court requested the Trial Judge, if the injunction application was still pending, to take up its hearing on the next date fixed and to endeavour to dispose of the suit expeditiously; after disposal of the connected applications, the suit itself was to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party. No order as to costs was made, and urgent certified photocopy of the order was permitted on compliance of usual formalities.

Chinu Rani Paul v. Subhajit Paul

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinu Rani Paul v. Subhajit Paul

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

Soma Dutta and Anr. Vs Lily Sarkar and Ors.

Amit Kumar Das Mahapatra Chowdhury and Ors. Vs Asim Kumar Das Mahapatra Chowdhury and Anr.

Tapan Kumar Dey Vs Tinkari Dey and Ors.

Shanti Sardar Vs Shefali James and Ors.

Vijoy Arora and Anr. Vs Anjali Seth and Ors.

Rupa Sengupta and Anr. Vs Sikta Sen