Sg vs Ct. 8 Dhirendra Kumar Mondal
2023 Latest Caselaw 2782 Cal

SAT 198 of 2015 Item-18.

20-04-2023 Ajay Kumar Nandi & Ors.

  sg
                                                    Versus
             Ct. 8                        Dhirendra Kumar Mondal

The matter initially appeared in the warning list on 6 th

March, 2023 and thereafter transferred to the regular list on 21 st

March, 2023. There was a clear indication in the list that the

matter shall be transferred to the daily cause list on 21 st March,

2023 and since then, the appeal is appearing in the list. In spite of

having due notice and knowledge that the matter is pending, the

appellants are not represented. The appellants have also not taken

any step to remove the defects as notified by the Additional Stamp

Reporter on 10th May, 2015. It is clear that the appellants are not

interested to proceed with the matter.

We could have dismissed the appeal for non-removal of the

defects. However, we propose to have a look at the judgments of

both the courts in order to find out whether the second appeal

involves any substantial question of law.

The judgment of the First Appellate Court dated 31 st

January, 2015 affirming the judgement and decree of the Trial

Court dated 22nd May, 2013 in a suit for declaration and

permanent injunction is the subject matter of challenge in this

second appeal.

In the absence of the appellants, we have carefully read the

judgements of both the courts and the ground of appeal. The

essential question that came up before the Trial Court was the

right of a path over which the plaintiff has claimed easement of

necessity. The evidence on record would suggest that the plaintiff

is the owner of the plot no. 7413 and there is no other way to

access the said plot apart from such passage that was blocked by

some tin and materials by the defendants. It has come out in

evidence that the said passage was blocked with the aforesaid

goods and materials. The report of the Local Inspection

Commissioner has corroborated the allegation of the plaintiff.

It was on such consideration, both the courts held that the

plaintiff is entitled to exercise right of passage over plot no. 7414

along with the defendants.

On such consideration, we are of the view that this second

appeal does not involve any substantial question of law and we

also do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by

the learned First Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the

learned Trial Court.

The second appeal stands dismissed at the admission stage.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

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