Disposed¶19

Swapan Kumar Mandal and Anr. v. Laljhi Shaw and Ors.

Calcutta HC21 May 2026CO/1667/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal; time-bound trial directions; Title Suit No. 495 of 2024; City Civil Court at Kolkata Bench-II; cross-examination of P.W. 1 pending since December 2, 2024; absence of defendants on April 2, 2026; earlier order dated September 19, 2025 in C.O. 3502 of 2025; four-month timeline from July 3, 2026; closure of plaintiff's evidence if cross-examination not concluded; C.O. 1667 of 2026; Calcutta High Court; Om Narayan Rai, J.; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Trial Court to conclude the evidence of both sides preferably within four months from the next date fixed (July 3, 2026) without unnecessary adjournments; P.W. 1's cross-examination to be closed if not completed by the date after July 3, 2026; hearing of the suit to proceed expeditiously; no order as to costs. ¶19

Swapan Kumar Mandal and Anr. Vs Laljhi Shaw and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the Trial Court should be directed to conclude the evidence and dispose of Title Suit No. 495 of 2024 within a fixed time-frame, without unnecessary adjournments.

¶9

Court's answer

The revisional application is disposed of by requesting the learned Judge, Bench-II, City Civil Court at Kolkata to conclude the evidence of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants expeditiously, preferably within four months from the next date fixed, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

If the defendants do not conclude the cross-examination of P.W. 1 on July 3, 2026, the Trial Court will pass appropriate orders to ensure it is concluded at the most by the next date, whereafter the cross-examination of the P.W.s shall stand closed if the defendants again seek time.

¶17

Key takeaways

The Trial Court is further requested to endeavour to conclude the hearing of the suit as expeditiously as its business permits, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party.ratio¶18
Prior notice dispensed with in view of the nature of the proposed order, but the petitioners must serve a copy of the revisional application together with a copy of the order on the opposite party within a week.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court (Civil Revisional Jurisdiction, Appellate Side), C.O. 1667 of 2026, decided 21.05.2026 (Om Narayan Rai, J.): Revisional application by the plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 495 of 2024 (City Civil Court, Kolkata, Bench-II) seeking expeditious disposal, noting that cross-examination of P.W. 1 begun on December 2, 2024 remained unconcluded despite an earlier order dated September 19, 2025 in C.O. 3502 of 2025 calling for speedy trial, and that the defendants were absent for cross-examination on April 2, 2026. Held/disposed: Trial Court requested to conclude evidence of both sides preferably within four months from the next date fixed (July 3, 2026) without unnecessary adjournments; if P.W. 1's cross-examination is not concluded on July 3, 2026, it must be finished at the most by the following date, failing which cross-examination of the P.W.s stands closed; hearing thereafter to be expedited as the Trial Court's business permits; petitioners to serve the application and order on the opposite party within a week; no costs.

¶1

Item No.- 21 21.05.2026 Court No. 6 Rohan

¶2

In the High Court at Calcutta Civil Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side

¶3

C.O. 1667 of 2026

¶4

Dr. Swapan Kumar Mandal & Anr.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. Laljhi Shaw & Ors.

¶7

Ms. Dipika Banu, Mr. S. Chakraborty, Ms. Bolivia Roy.

¶8

… for the Petitioners

¶9

This revisional application seeks expeditious disposal of Title Suit No. 495 of 2024 pending before the learned Judge, Bench-II, City Civil Court at Kolkata.

¶10

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has taken this Court through the orders fixing dates for cross-examination of P.W. 1, which began on December 2, 2024 and is yet to be concluded. By the order dated April 2, 2026 (which happens to be the last order in the series of the orders pertaining to crossexamination of P.W. 1) the next date has been fixed on July 3, 2026. It is evident from the order dated April 2, 2026 that on the said date, neither the defendants nor their learned advocate was present to cross examine the plaintiffs’ witness.

¶11

The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has also invited the attention of this Court to an earlier order dated September 19, 2025 passed by this Court

¶12

¶13

in C.O. 3502 of 2025, whereby, the learned Trial Court had been requested to make an endeavour to dispose of Title Suit No. 495 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. It is noticed that after the order dated September 19, 2025 having been passed, almost six months have expired and the crossexamination of the plaintiffs’ witness No. 1 is still under way.

¶14

Having regard to the nature of the order proposed to be passed, direction for prior service of a copy of the revisional application along with notice is not being made, however, the petitioners shall remain obliged to serve a copy of the revisional application along with a copy of this order on the opposite party within a week form date.

¶15

Having heard the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and having perused the materials on record, this revisional application is disposed of by requesting the learned Judge, Bench-II, City Civil Court at Kolkata to conclude the evidence of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months form the next date fixed without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

¶16

¶17

It is clarified that if on the next date fixed, i.e., on July 3, 2026, the cross-examination of P.W. 1 is not concluded by the defendants, then in that case, the learned Trial Court will pass appropriate orders so as to ensure that the same is concluded, at the most, by the next date whereafter, the cross-examination of P.W.s shall stand closed if time is again sought for by the defendants for the purpose of conclusion of such cross-examination.

¶18

The learned Trial Court is further requested to endeavour to conclude the hearing of the suit as expeditiously as the business of the learned Trial Court would permit without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations, C.O. 1667 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶20

Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶21

(Om Narayan Rai, J.)

Swapan Kumar Mandal and Anr. v. Laljhi Shaw and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapan Kumar Mandal and Anr. v. Laljhi Shaw 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

Kanailal Chawla Vs Prabhat Jhawar

Skypath Reality Pvt. Ltd. Vs Binod Kumar Agarwala and Ors.

Samar Manna and Ors. Vs Shanti Kundu and Ors.

Tarak Dutta and Ors. Vs Sandhya Dutta and Ors.

Rina Kundu and Ors. Vs Subhash Kundu

Tinku Choudhury and Anr. Vs Namita Sarkar and Ors.