Vijay Shankar Sharma v. Shanti Devi Singh And ORS

20.11.2024 Ct. No. 22 Sl. No.142 KB In The High Court at Calcutta Civil Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side CO 3707 of 2022 Vijay Shankar Sharma -versus- Sri Shanti Devi Singh & Ors.

Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi Mr. Bikash Kumar Singh Mrs. Swapna Jha Mr. Bankim Pal ... For the petitioner.

1. Certified copy of the orders passed by the learned Trial Court is taken on record.

2. Affidavit of Service is filed and taken on record.

3. None appears on behalf of the opposite parties in spite of service of notice.

4. This revisional application has been filed with a prayer for early disposal of the Title Suit No. 165 of 2011 pending before the Learned Judge, 11th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta.

5. It is submitted that the suit is now pending for compliance of the order of the Court to deposit the amount to the tune of Rs.1,20,000/- towards cost of examination of questioned document by the central agency.

6. It is further contended that during pendency of this revisional application several directions were made by the Learned Trial Court for depositing Rs.1,20,000/-

towards cost of handwriting expert of central agency. But that was not complied with by the defendants who made application for examination of the questioned document by the expert of central agency.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has prayed for necessary direction towards disposal of the suit pending since 2011.

8. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the certified copy of the orders passed by the Court, I find that the questioned document was sent to central agency for examination by the expert, on an application filed by the defendants/opposite parties herein and necessary direction was given to the defendants to deposit the cost of examination.

9. From the copy of the orders, it appears that in spite of repeated orders, cost was not deposited by the defendants.

10. In this trying situation, learned Trial Judge is directed to dispose of the Title Suit, being No.165 of 2011, preferably within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order, without giving any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties.

11. With the aforesaid observation, CO 3707 of 2022 stands disposed of.

12. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is at liberty to bring this order to the notice of the learned Trial Court forthwith.

13. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

14. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of necessary formalities.

(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)