Ar vs Binoy Kumar Mondal
2022 Latest Caselaw 7969 Cal

12      01.12.2022                      FAT 337 of 2015
Ct-08
                                                with
                          I.A No. CAN 1 of 2015 (Old CAN No. 7342 of 2015)
                              CAN 2 of 2015 (Old CAN No. 7343 of 2015)

                                     Anjali Mondal & Ors.
ar                                             Vs.
                                      Binoy Kumar Mondal

                        Mr. Partha Pratim Roy
                        Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal
                        Ms. Poulami Chakraborty
                                    ... For the Appellants

                        Mrs. Manali Biswas
                                   ... For the Respondent

Re: CAN 2 of 2015 (Old CAN No. 7343 of 2015) (Condonation of delay)

This is an application for condonation of delay of 123 days in filing the memorandum of appeal as reported by the additional stamp reporter vide his report dated 15th July, 2015.

Sufficient cause being shown for delay in preferring the appeal beyond the statutory period, we are inclined to condone the delay of 123 days in presenting the memorandum of appeal. The application for condonation of delay is, thus, allowed without any order as to costs. Office is directed to register the appeal if it is, otherwise, in form.

Re: CAN 1 of 2015 (Old CAN No. 7342 of 2015) (Stay)

This is an application for injunction. The appeal is arising out of the judgment dismissing the suit filed by the appellants challenging the deed of gift, which was alleged to have been executed by one Rajendra Nath Mondal in favour

of respondent/defendant.

The appellant no. 1 is the mother of the respondent and other appellants/plaintiffs are the sisters of the respondent/defendant. It is an admitted position that the appellant no. 1 along with her two unmarried daughters are residing in the suit premises.

The injunction application was filed in the year 2015 and since then no attempt was made to move the said application. The injunction is an equitable remedy. However, having regard to the fact that the deed is declared to be void in all the co-sharers in respect of the property in question, we dispose of the injunction application by directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to their possession in the suit property till the disposal of the appeal. The parties shall not change the nature and character of the suit property till that time. Since no affidavit is filed, all allegations are deemed to have been denied.

CAN 7342 of 2015 is thus disposed of.

Let the hearing of the appeal be expedited. Since Mrs. Manali Biswas, the learned counsel representing the respondent appears, service of notice of appeal upon the sole respondent is dispensed with.

We call for the lower court's record through a special messenger at the cost of the appellants and such cost is to be put in within one week from date. Registrar Administration (L & OM) is directed to see that the lower court's record is reached this court within ten days from the date of putting in the special messenger cost. Immediately after arrival of the lower court's

record office shall examine the same and, if

found complete, shall serve notice of arrival of lower court's record on the learned advocate for the appellants at once.

The appellants are given liberty to prepare and file requisite number of paper books - printed, typewritten or cyclostyled, as the case may be - by 30th January, 2023 upon prior service to the respondent.

Failing which, the interim order shall stand revived.

Let the appeal appear in the monthly combined list of February, 2023 under the heading "Hearing".

There will be no order as to costs.

(Uday Kumar, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)