Kaustubh Moni Pal Vs Kaushik Pal — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kaustubh Moni Pal Vs Kaushik Pal — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of with the impugned judgment and decree set aside and the matter remanded to the learned Trial Judge, who is to consider the written objection to the Partition Commissioner's report, grant the parties opportunity to cross-examine the Partition Commissioner, give them a hearing on the report, and pass a fresh final decree of partition; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the final decree of partition was validly passed when the learned Trial Judge neither took into consideration the appellant's written objection to the Commissioner's report nor granted the plaintiff/appellant any opportunity to cross-examine the Commissioner.

Court's answer

This court found substance in the appellant's contention that the final decree of partition was passed without taking into consideration the appellant's written objection to the Commissioner's report and without granting the plaintiff/appellant any opportunity to cross-examine the Commissioner.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned judgment and decree were set aside and the matter remanded to the learned Trial Judge.

Key takeaways

On remand, the learned Trial Judge is to pass a fresh final decree of partition upon consideration of the written objection filed by the plaintiff/appellant to the Partition Commissioner's report, granting the parties opportunity to cross-examine the Partition Commissioner and giving them an opportunity of hearing on the Partition Commissioner's report.ratio¶11
The merits of the parties' contentions otherwise were not entered into by this court; it is open to the learned Trial Judge to decide all such issues independently in accordance with law without being influenced in any manner by the observations made above.obiter¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

First Appeal (FA 88 of 2025, with CAN 2 of 2024) by Kaustubh Moni Pal (plaintiff below) against Sri Kaushik Pal, preferred against a final decree of partition passed by the learned Trial Judge without taking into consideration the appellant's written objection to the Commissioner's report and without granting the plaintiff/appellant any opportunity to cross-examine the Commissioner. Counsel for the respondent fairly conceded that the appeal could be heard on this limited question with a remand thereon. Taking up the appeal itself along with the application, dispensing with formal preparation of paper books and without calling for the records, the bench (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. and Uday Kumar, J.; decision dated 18.02.2025) found substance in the appellant's contention, set aside the impugned judgment and decree, and remanded the matter to the learned Trial Judge to pass a fresh final decree of partition upon consideration of the written objection to the Partition Commissioner's report, granting the parties opportunity to cross-examine the Partition Commissioner and giving them an opportunity of hearing on the report. The court expressly did not enter into the merits of the parties' contentions otherwise, leaving the Trial Judge free to decide all issues independently in accordance with law without being influenced by its observations; given the long pendency of the suit, expeditious hearing after remand was expected. No order as to costs.