Smita Paul Majumder v. Dr Tanmoy Mukhopadhyay

13.04.

C.O. 793 of 2022 15.

AGM /RKB Ct Smt. Smita Paul Majumder.

Vs.

Dr. Tanmoy Mukhopadhyay.

Mr. Rabindra Kumar Jaiswal.

... For the petitioner.

A direction to secure expeditious disposal of injunction application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure is the ultimate relief sought for in this case.

Admittedly the petitioner/defendant has been suffering ad interim order of injunction. It is disclosed by the learned advocate for the petitioner that objection to the prayer for temporary injunction has already been submitted. The only contention expressed by the learned advocate for the petitioner is against the delay caused in the disposal of the temporary injunction application.

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be made in this case, no prior notice is considered to be necessary.

The service upon the opposite parties is thus dispensed with, so far as the present revisional application is concerned.

Accordingly learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) 1st Court at Barasat in Title Suit No. 436 of 2020 is

requested to ensure expeditious disposal of application for temporary injunction, providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to either of the party to this case, but without granting unnecessary adjournment, unless it is extremely unavoidable While endeavouring such exercise, the other interlocutory applications, if any, kept pending may also be disposed of, after disposal of the temporary injunction application.

Petitioner is directed to make communication of this order to the learned court below as well as to the learned advocate appearing in the court below for the opposite party and the opposite party as well. With this observation and direction, the revisional application stands disposed of.

Urgent phostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertakings (Subhasis Dasgupta, J)