The State Of West Bengal vs Sudev Ganguly
2022 Latest Caselaw 5880 Cal

25.08.2022
Court No.32
 rpan/06
                              FAT 83 of 2019
                                      +
                   IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 2293 of 2019)
                                       +
                  IA No.: CAN 2 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 2358 of 2019)

                            The State of West Bengal
                                    - Versus -
                                 Sudev Ganguly

                    Mr. Supratim Dhar,
                                  ... for the Appellant.
                    Mr. Sayan Mukherjee
                                  ... for the Respondent.

In Re.: IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 2293 of 2019)

Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing on

behalf of the respondent files an affidavit-in-opposition in

connection with the application under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act and opposes the application.

The present appeal has been filed challenging the

judgment and decree dated 31st May, 2016 and 9th

August, 2016 respectively passed by the learned Special

Land Acquisition Judge, Additional District Judge, 1 st

Court, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South) in L.A. Case No.59 of

2007(V).

We have heard the advocate appearing for the

respective parties. We have considered the pleadings of

the parties and materials on record. The report of the

Additional Stamp Reporter dated 25th February, 2019

indicates that there is a delay of 875 days in preferring

the present appeal. We find that the dismissal of the

appeal at this stage on the ground of limitation may cause

serious prejudice to the appellant and a bona fide defence

may be lost. We do not find the appellant to be a negligent

litigant. We find that the delay has been sufficiently

explained. We thus condone the delay of 875 days in

preferring the present appeal upon payment of cost of

Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the appellant to the

respondent. Such cost must be paid by two weeks.

In the event the aforesaid cost is not paid to the

respondent, the order passed in the present application

for condonation of delay will automatically stand recalled.

The application under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act, being IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 2293 of

2019) is allowed.

In Re.: IA No.: CAN 2 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 2358 of 2019)

In connection with the aforesaid appeal an

application, being IA No.: CAN 2 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN

2358 of 2019), has also been filed by the appellant, inter

alia praying for stay of operation of the judgment and

decree impugned.

We have heard Mr. Dhar, learned advocate

appearing in support of the aforesaid application. He

submits that unless the aforesaid judgment and decree is

stayed, the appellant shall suffer irreparable loss.

Mr. Mukherjee learned advocate appearing for the

respondent/claimant opposes the present application.

We have heard the learned advocates appearing for

the respective parties and considered the averments made

in the application and the materials on record. We are

informed that an execution application has already been

filed. We are of the view that unless an interim order on

appropriate terms is passed the appellant shall suffer

irreparable loss. There shall be an interim order

restraining the respondent from proceeding with the.

Execution case no. 13 of 2019 for a period of four weeks

from date. Upon deposit of the entire decretal amount, as

determined by the learned Special Land Acquisition

Judge, Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Alipore, 24-

Parganas (South) in L.A. Case No.59 of 2007(V) by the

appellant within a period of four weeks from date with the

learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta, the

interim order granted above shall continue till disposal of

the appeal.

In the event the decretal amount is deposited, the

learned Registrar General shall invest the said sum in a

suitable, interest bearing, fixed deposit in any nationalized

Bank of his/her choice to be renewed from time to time till

disposal of the appeal.

In default, the respondent would be at liberty to

proceed with the execution case.

The application for stay, being IA No.: CAN 2 of 2019

(Old No.: CAN 2358 of 2019) is, accordingly, disposed of.

In Re.: FAT 83 of 2019

Let the hearing of the appeal be expedited.

As Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate enters

appearance on behalf of the respondent/claimant, service

of notice of appeal upon the said respondent is dispensed

with.

Lower Court Records be called for through the

Special Messenger at the cost of the appellant. Such cost

shall be deposited within seven days from date.

Immediately after arrival of the Lower Court

Records, the office shall examine the same and, if found

complete shall issue notice of arrival of Lower Court

Records to the learned advocates representing the

parties.

The appellant is directed to prepare and file

requisite number of informal paper books-printed,

typewritten or cyclostyled, as the case may be, out of

court, within six weeks from the date of service of notice

of arrival of Lower Court Records and shall file the same

after serving a copy thereof upon the learned advocate

appearing for the respondent.

All formalities regarding preparation of paper books

are dispensed with but the learned advocate for the

appellant is directed to incorporate all the relevant

documents in the informal paper books.

Immediately upon filing of the paper books, the

office shall put a seal that the appeal is ready for hearing.

Liberty to mention.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of

all requisite formalities.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)