Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Railway Supply Corporation Pvt. ... vs East Coast Ispat Pvt Ltd on 7 October, 2021
09 07.10.
AGM
Ct
07 C.O. 1813 of 2021
Railway Supply Corporation Pvt. Ltd
Versus
East Coast Ispat Pvt Ltd
(Via Video conference)
Mr. Joy Saha,
Mr. Tanish Ganeriwala,
... For the Petitioner.
The Court is approached under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India soliciting a direction to
ensure expeditious disposal of multiple interlocutory
applications filed by the opposite parties in
connection with pending execution case being T. Ex
65 of 2019 arising out of Title Suit No. 8305 of
2014, now pending before learned Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Second Court at Alipore.
Mr. Joy Saha, learned senior advocate
representing the petitioner/decree-holder submits
that petitioner got a decree of eviction in the year
2019, though the suit was filed in the year 2014.
The decree has been put into execution, when the
opposite party has entered his appearance and filed
multiple applications intending to stall the decree so
that the fruits of the decree may be delayed in any
manner whatsoever.
Mr. Saha contends that till date four (4) of
such applications, like application under Order 9
Rule 13 C.P.C., application for stay of execution
proceeding, application under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act and a separate application under
Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act filed by
the opposite party are pending before the
executing Court, which have to be expeditiously
disposed of.
It is thus gathered from the submission
advanced by Mr. Saha that by filing multiple
interlocutory applications, the entire purpose is to
frustrate the decree causing delay to the instant
execution proceeding.
In such context Mr. Saha has proposed for a
direction so that all pending interlocutory
applications may be disposed of expeditiously within
a time frame.
In view of the nature of the order proposed to
be made and the point sought to be addressed by
this Court, the Court is of the view that it does not
require any extensive hearing, and the matter may
be instantly disposed of giving a suitable direction
therefor, even without securing presence of the
opposite party/judgment-debtor.
Accordingly, service upon the opposite
party/judgment debtor stands dispensed with.
Upon perusal of the last order of the Court
below, it appears that the executing Court has fixed
4th October, 2021 for hearing of Section 5
application under Limitation Act for condonation of
delay.
It is gathered knowledge that till date neither
Section 5 application, nor any other interlocutory
application has been disposed of by the Court
below.
Having considered the submissions of the
learned advocate for the petitioner, the instant
revisional application be disposed of directing the
Court below to dispose of Section 5 application
praying for condonation of delay followed by other
interlocutory applications, the reference of which is
mentioned above, expeditiously as possible,
providing sufficient opportunities of hearing to
either of the parties to this case, but without
granting unnecessary adjournments, unless it is
extremely unavoidable, preferably within March,
2022.
The petitioner is directed to communicate this
order to the opposite party and learned advocate
appearing in the Court below, apart from making
independent communication to the learned Court
below.
With these directions and observations the
revisional application stands disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Urgent phostat certified copy of the order, if
applied for, be given to the appearing parties as
expeditiously as possible on compliance of all
necessary formalities.
(Subhasis Dasgupta, J)
