SAT/335/2016
2021 Latest Caselaw 219 Cal

7        18.01.2021
sd                                           SAT 335 of 2016

Ct .9.
                               Mr. Gopal Chandra Ghosh
                                                   ..For the applicant.
                               Mr. Shibnath Ganguly
                                                   ..respondent/opposite party.

Re: CAN 7920 of 2016

Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of

the appellants invites my attention to the order dated

22.01.2016 wherein the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court

formulated substantial question of law while admitting the

appeal and leave granted to respondent to file affidavit in

opposition within three weeks after reopening of the

Chrismas vacation but affidavit in opposition filed on

18.01.2017 is presented today before this Court.

Let it be kept with the record.

Let a copy of the application be served upon

learned advocate for the respondent in course of the day.

List CAN 7920 of 2016 on 02.02.2021.

Reply, if any, be filed in the meantime.

Re: CAN 9730 of 2018

Heard learned advocate for the respondents and the

appellants.

In this application the respondents/petitioners have

sought for an order to set aside and/or modification of the

order dated 22.12.2016 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench

restraining the opposite parties/ appellants/ defendants/

judgment debtors from entering into the suit property for

cultivation and further restraining them from causing any

type of disturbances, obstructions and/or interference in any

manner whatsoever.

Merit of injunction application can be heard and

decided along with application being CAN being 7920 of 2016

upon exchange of affidavits.

However, this Court takes note of the prayer

portion of the application for modification of the order dated

22.12.2016 which has been passed by the Division Bench of

this Court while admitting the appeal.

Such prayer cannot be considered.

Accordingly, application being CAN 9730 of 2018 is

dismissed, however, without any order as to cost.

Re: CAN 9731 of 2018

This is an application for maintainability of the

Second Appeal, inter alia, on the grounds that the trial court

passed the judgment on 27.11.2014 upon hearing both

parties and the suit was decreed on contest without any cost

against the defendants and the right, title, interest and

possession in respect of Schedule A and C of the plaintiff no.

1 was declared whereas the right, title, interest and

possession in respect of two third share in B schedule

property was declared in favour of the plaintiff no. 2, 3-6.

Plaintiffs were also granted decree for permanent injunction

against the defendants restraining them from creating any

disturbance in peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the

suit property in any manner whatsoever.

The appeal is continuation of the suit, but the

appeal has been admitted upon formulation of substantial

question of law by the Hon'ble Division Bench. Therefore, the

appeal be heard on its merit and the maintainability of the

Second Appeal can be considered on its merit. The appeal is

not ready right now for being heard.

With the above observation, CAN 9731 of 2018 is

disposed of. No Cost.

Let the appeal be placed for final hearing after

completion of all legal formality.

(Shivakant Prasad, J. )