Rajib Panja v. Paromita Basu

AG 05.05.

M Ct C.O. 966 of 2022 Rajib Panja Vs Paromita Basu Mr. Gaganjit Singh, ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Sekhar Mukherjee, Mr. Vijay Verma, Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, ... for the opposite party. Ms. Sofia Nesar, Mr. Santanu Sett, A direction to secure expeditious disposal of Matrimonial Suit No. 393 of 2018, is the ultimate relief sought for in this case.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, learned advocate ensures his appearance as opposite party in this case, upon receiving a copy supplied to him in Court by the learned advocate for the petitioner.

The only contention expressed by the learned advocate for the petitioner is against the delay caused in the disposal of the suit.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure has already been filed seeking rejection of the plaint, which has not yet been disposed of. That being the position, there is an existence of interlocutory application under Order 7 Rule 11 of

the CPC at least.

Accordingly, learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Baruipur, 24 Pargnas (South) in Matrimonial Suit No. 393 of 2018 is requested to ensure expeditious disposal of interlocutory application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to either of the parties to this case, but without granting unnecessary adjournment, unless it is extremely unavoidable. This would not, however prevent the Court below to ensure expeditious disposal of pending matrimonial suit in accordance with the provisions of law.

With this observation and direction, the revisional application stands disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertakings.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J)