Chhanda Rani Roy vs Mahadeb Kundu & Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 4795 Cal

26.07.2022
Court No.32
 rpan/05


                                 FAT 328 of 2019
                                          +
                   IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 6968 of 2019)
                                         and
                          CAN 2 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 12133 of 2019)
                                  Chhanda Rani Roy
                                      - Versus -
                               Mahadeb Kundu & Others


                             Mr. Uttiya Ray,
                             Mr. Arnab Mandal
                                         ... for the Appellant.
                             Mr. Bhagbat Chaudhuri,
                             Mr.Sariful Islam Mallick
                                          ... for the Respondents.

The present appeal has been preferred challenging

the judgment and decree dated 27th day of February, 2019

passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1 st

Additional Court, Burdwan in Title Suit No.107 of 2015.

In connection with the appeal an application for

condonation of delay, being IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old

No.: CAN 6968 of 2019) and an application for stay, being

CAN 2 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 12133 of 2019) have been

filed.

Upon hearing Mr. Ray, learned advocate appearing

for the appellant and Mr. Chaudhuri, learned advocate

appearing for the respondents and considering the

averments made in the condonation application, we are

satisfied with the explanation given towards delay of

about 30 days in preferring the present appeal.

Accordingly, such delay is condoned and the application,

being IA No.: CAN 1 of 2019 (Old No.: CAN 6968 of 2019)

is disposed of.

Mr. Ray submits that the learned court below did

not take into consideration the fact that the suit property

was amicably partitioned about 20 years ago. The parties

are in possession of their respective shares and the denial

of the interim order, as prayed for, may lead to

multiplicity of proceedings and would cause severe

prejudice to the appellant.

Mr. Chaudhuri, learned advocate appearing for the

respondents, however, denies and disputes the contention

of the appellant.

We have been informed that the Partition

Commissioner has already been appointed.

The Partition Commissioner would be at liberty to

proceed with the partition work. However, no final decree

shall be passed till the disposal of the present appeal.

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

12133 of 2019), is, accordingly, disposed of.

Let the hearing of the appeal be expedited.

As Mr. Chaudhuri, learned advocate, has entered

appearance on behalf of the respondents, service of notice

of appeal upon the said respondents is dispensed with.

Lower court records be called for through Special

Messenger at the cost of the appellant. Such cost shall be

deposited within two weeks from date.

Immediately, after arrival of 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 appearing for the appellant and the

respondents.

Appellant is directed to prepare requisite number

of informal paper books - printed, typewritten or

cyclostyled, as the case may be, out of Court, within four

weeks from the date of service of notice of arrival of lower

court records and shall file the same after serving copies

thereof upon the learned advocate appearing for the

respondents.

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.

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.)