Smt. Bina Debi Bagaria And Ors vs Ruchir Bagaria And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 1637 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Smt. Bina Debi Bagaria And Ors vs Ruchir Bagaria And Ors on 9 March, 2026

Author: Arindam Mukherjee

Bench: Arindam Mukherjee

OD-6

                                 ORDER SHEET

                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                             ORIGINAL SIDE

                             IA No. GA/7/2025
                                     In
                                CS/31/2019
                     SMT. BINA DEBI BAGARIA AND ORS.
                                  VERSUS
                        RUCHIR BAGARIA AND ORS.


BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHERJEE
Date: 9th March, 2026.


                                                                           Appearance:
                                                     Mr. Ajay Kumar Bagaria, (in person)
                                                                       Plaintiff no.1(d).

                                                             Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv.
                                                                Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Adv.
                                                                 Mr. Altamash Alim, Adv.
                                                                            For the KMC.

                                                                   Mr. Sujit Mitra, Adv.
                                              For the proposed respondent no.10 (EPFO)

Ms. Akanksha Mukherjee, Adv.

For the defendant nos. 1(a), 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(d).

The Court:- In a suit, inter se between the partners and/or successor-in-

interest of the partners of a partnership firm by the name "N.K. Bagaria &

Sons", this is an application by the substituted plaintiffs for adding a former

employee of the partnership, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and

the son of the erstwhile Receiver.

On a perusal of the application as also the relief(s) sought for in the

plaint, I do not find the presence of either Shiv Kumar Sharma, a former

employee of the partnership firm or the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

or the son of the Receiver is necessary for the adjudication of the disputes nor

any relief has been sought for against any of them. They are as such neither

necessary or a proper party to this suit.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is dismissed,

however, without any order as to costs since one of the substituted plaintiffs is

appearing in person.

(ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.)

snn.