Biplab Roy v. Amal Roy And ORS

Item No.1 20.02.2026 Court. No. 7 GB CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

CO 19 of 2026 Sri Biplab Roy VS Sri Amal Roy & Ors.

Mr. Anurag Sharma, Mr. Saumyajyoti Dutta ... for the Petitioner.

1. I do not wish to interfere with the order impugned dated December 15, 2025. By the said order the learned court directed the police authorities to ensure that the order of status quo with regard to nature, character and possession of the suit property be maintained. The application for injunction is yet to be disposed of.

2. The petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps if he is aggrieved by the ad-interim order.

3. The plaintiff had specifically alleged before the learned court that even after the order of status quo was passed, the defendants were acting in violation of the order of status quo. The plaintiff approached the police authorities as also the Superintendent of Police for redressal but the authorities did not take steps.

4. It appears from the order dated March 17, 2025, that the court had come to a, prima facie, finding

that the plaintiff also had a share in the suit property along with the defendants. Thus, the status of the property should be maintained by the parties, as it was at the time of passing of the order of status quo, i.e. nature, character and possession should be preserved.

5. The order impugned does not indicate that the defendants have been additionally restrained in any manner. The police authorities have been asked to preserve the status of the property.

6. Under such circumstances, the application is disposed of without any interference with the order of the court.

7. Parties are directed to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)