Shyamal Kr. Ghosh And ANR. v. Sanghamitra Shah And ANR.

02.09.

C.O. 1966 of 2022 ML AGM Ct Sri Shyamal Kumjar Ghosh & Anr Vs Sanghamitra Shah & Anr Mr. Ayan Banerjee, Mr. Soumo Chawdhury, ... For the petitioners.

A direction to secure expeditious disposal of interlocutory applications, filed by the petitioners under Section 151 of the CPC, is the ultimate relief sought for in this case.

Admittedly, the petitioner is the defendant.

There is also two other interlocutory applications being filed by the opposite parties/plaintiffs under Order 6 Rule 17 and under Order 39 Rule 7 CPC. It is submitted by the petitioner that the order of injunction previously granted by this Court has been modified on the prayer of the petitioners in aid of Order 39 Rule 4 CPC.

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

Service of notice of this application upon opposite parties stands dispensed with.

Accordingly, the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bidhannagar, in Title Suit No. 213 of 2010 is requested to ensure expeditious disposal of

petitioners/defendants application under Section 151 of the CPC read with application filed by the opposite parties/plaintiffs in the mean time under Order 39 Rule 7 of the CPC, providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to either of the parties to this case, but without granting unnecessary adjournments, unless it is extremely unavoidable.

Petitioners are 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 parties and the opposite parties. 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)