Sri Gouri Sankar Mondal & Anr vs Sri Pradip Kumar Achar & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 6848 Cal

Dl.   September
23.   22, 2022
                                          S.A. 36 of 2021

                               Sri Gouri Sankar Mondal & anr.

                                                 Vs.

                               Sri Pradip Kumar Achar & ors.

                               The present appeal is of the year 2007, but no attempt

                  was made to move the same for admission. The appeal was kept

                  pending for almost fifteen years before we directed this matter to be

                  listed on September 9, 2022. Since then the matter is appearing in

                  the list. In spite of sufficient notice, the appellants are not

                  represented, nor any accommodation is prayed for. However, we

                  propose to consider the question of admission of the present second

                  appeal on the basis of the materials available on record.

                               The judgment and decree of affirmance dated January

                  19, 2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast

                  Track Court at Haldia, Purba Medinipur, in Title Appeal No. 94 of

                  2004 arising out of judgment and decree dated December 19, 2000

                  passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Third Court at

                  Midnapore, in Title Suit No. 34 of 1988, which is a suit for specific

                  performance of contract for sale, is the subject matter of challenge

                  in this appeal.

                               Both the courts below found that at the time of

                  execution of the agreement for sale, the respondent no. 1 was minor.

Moreover, the evidence would show that the properties were sold at

a time when the defendant no. 1 was minor and that this was all

done pursuant to the permission obtained from the court by the

mother of the defendant no. 1/respondent no. 1.

On such consideration, we do not find any reason to

interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by both the

courts below. We do not find any substantial question of law

involved in this appeal for which the same is required to be

admitted.

The second appeal is, therefore, summarily dismissed

under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

In view of dismissal of the appeal, nothing remains to

be decided in the connected application for stay filed under CAN

5827 of 2007 and the same is also dismissed.

There will be no order as to costs.

                                                  ( Soumen Sen, J. )



dns                                               ( Uday Kumar, J. )