Manas Kumar Panda & Ors vs Sakti Pada Sahoo & Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 667 Cal

  14.
28.01.2021
S.D. & sd.


                                   S.M.A. 2 of 2018
                                        With
                       CAN 1 of 2017 (Old CAN No. 4514 of 2017)
                       CAN 2 of 2018 (Old CAN No. 1034 of 2018)

                              Manas Kumar Panda & Ors.
                                         Vs.
                               Sakti Pada Sahoo & Anr.

                  Mr. Ayan Poddar
                  Ms. Moumi Yasmin
                              ......For the Petitioners/Appellants.

                  Mr. Amit Baran Dash
                                ...For the Respondent/Applicant.

In re: CAN 2 of 2018 (Old CAN No. 1034 of 2018)

This is an application for appropriate order for

modification and vacating the injunction order of status quo

dated 30.10.2017 for non-compliance of the order by the

appellant inter alia on the ground that the costs for Special

Messenger has not been deposited in the department for

bringing the Lower Court Records. But the learned Advocate

for the respondent submits a photocopy of Central Dispatch

Section which reflects that a sum of Rs.500/- has been

deposited on 3.11.2017 vide Serial No. D-843 for sending

Special Messenger to Additional District Judge, 1st Court,

Contai in Misc. Appeal No. 20 of 2016 for being the LCR.

Therefore, it cannot be said that there has been non-

compliance of the Court's order warranting modification

and/or vacating of the order of status quo as passed by the

Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated

30.10.2017.

Now, the department is directed to report to this Court

as to whether the Lower Court Records have been called for

or not by the date.

In the context of the above, the application being CAN

2 of 2018 (Old CAN No. 1034 of 2018) is disposed of with the

direction to see that the appeal is made ready for hearing as

early as possible.

No order as to costs.

In re: CAN 1 of 2017 (Old CAN No. 4514 of 2017)

This application is filed on behalf of the appellants for

stay of the judgment and order dated 09.03.2017 passed by the

learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Contai in Misc.

Appeal No. 20 of 2016, inter alia, on the ground that the

appellants are the owners in possession of the suit property

mentioned in the Schedule A and B by virtue of purchase and

their names have been mutated in the Records of Right.

Accordingly, by filing this application vide Prayer (a), the

appellants have prayed for declaring them as the true and

rightful owners in respect of the Schedule A and B property

and to restrain the defendant/respondent by an order of

permanent injunction from disturbing the peaceful possession

of the appellants in respect of the scheduled property.

The contentions so raised in the application vide prayer

(a) can be decided at the time when the appeal can be heard on

its merits. However, vide prayer (b), the appellants have

prayed for staying of the operation of the impugned judgment

and order passed by the appeal court below and so also the

execution proceedings being Title Execution No. 02 of 2009

pending before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) 2nd Court,

Contai arising out of Title Suit No. 44 of 1999. The Division

Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 30.10.2017

directed the parties to maintain status quo as regards

possession in the suit property to be maintained till the

disposal of the application.

Therefore, this application is disposed of with a

direction that status quo as passed on 30.10.2017 is made

hereby absolute in so far as the status quo to be maintained by

the parties as regards their possession in the suit property till

the disposal of the appeal, however, without prejudice to the

rights and contentions of the parties to the appeal.

Thus CAN 1 of 2017 (Old No. CAN 4514 of 2017 is

disposed of.

Let this matter appear in the list two weeks hence

under the same heading.

(Shivakant Prasad, J.)