Shri.T.Veeraswamy And ANR v. The Sahara Association

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/21/2026 Shri T. Veeraswamy & Anr.

Vs The Sahara Association Mr. K.M.B.Jayapal ... for the petitioners Ms. G. Mini ... for the opposite party March 16, 2026 [AKB] Item No.5 1.

This revisional application has been filed against the refusal order No. 57 dated March 6, 2026 passed in Other Execution Case No. 1 of 2023 in respect of the prayer made by the present petitioner for depositing the occupational charge as directed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the Execution after a delay of one day.

2.

The contention of learned advocate representing the petitioner is that against a judgement and order of eviction the petitioner filed a Title appeal but the learned Appellate Court could not take up the stay application due to pecuniary jurisdiction at the relevant point of time. The said Decree was put into execution seeking execution of the Decree and prayed for police protection under order XXI Rule 35(3) of CPC and the learned Executing court despite being appraised of the factum of appeal pending proceeded with the execution case. However, the said issue was set at rest in FAT No. 4 of 2025 (Andaman Plantation and Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India dated 09.03.2026.

3.

The petitioner/Judgement Debtor meantime filed a revisional application and the learned Coordinate Bench while disposing of such revisional application imposed certain conditions vide its order dated 18.12.2025.

"(e) In the event the petitioners deposit the first installment on account of arrear occupation charges on or before January 13, 2026, the unconditional order of stay shall continue till the disposal of the Title Appeal, subject to the condition that the petitioners are not in default of payment of the last installment on account of arrears of occupation charges as well as the current occupation charges within the time limit indicated herein before. (f) In the event there is any default either with regard to the deposit of any of the installments on account of arrear occupation charges or the current occupation charges, the order of stay shall automatically stands vacated without any further reference to this Court."

4.

According to the learned advocate he is regularly complying with the such direction, however, only in month of the March 2026 instead of 5th March, 2026 he took out the application to deposit the occupation charges on 06th March, 2026 which was not accepted by the learned Executing Court in view of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench. 5.

It is submitted that there was a gross mistake on the part of the petitioner and hence prayed for extending such date by a single day.

6.

It is further submitted that under Section 148 A of Code of Civil Procedure, this Court is empowered to pass such order of extension.

7.

Learned advocate representing the opposite party on the other hand raises vehement objection and submits that the order passed by the Hon'ble Bench was very specific about the date stipulated therein within which such deposit has to be made and in default the order of stay to vacate automatically without any further reference to Court. So it was the word

'shall' which is directory in nature, hence the prayer made by the petitioner is not maintainable. That apart no reason has been assigned for filing of such petition after the stipulated date is over.

8.

Having heard both the learned counsel and on careful perusal of the materials on record and condition imposed by the learned Coordinate Bench, it transpires that the specific direction was given to the petitioner to pay the occupational charges as well as the arrear charges within a stipulated period which is by 5th day of each succeeding English Calendar month. Admittedly the petitioner has filed application on 6th March instead of 05th March, 2026 i.e. after the last day stipulated in the order. It is also seen that application is silent about any reason for such one day delay.

On careful perusal of the record it transpires that the statutory appeal is pending before the Appellate Court against the order of eviction passed by the learned Trial Court and the Learned Co-ordinate Bench also inclined to consider the prayer to stay of the operation of the Judgement and Decree of eviction on the peculiar situation that the District Judge was unable to consider the stay petition on jurisdictional issues. Therefore unless an interim protection is given the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury. 9.

It goes without saying that the petitioner was negligent in filing the application within time but the said application was filed on the very next day of the last stipulated date that is on 5th March, 2026 which prima facie shows that there was no intentional laches on the part of the petitioner . Considering the

fact that the petitioner has suffered an eviction decree and the application is filed immediately on the next date so stipulated, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer made by the petitioner.

10. Therefore the period as stipulated by the learned Coordinate Bench is extended for a single day i.e. upto 6th only for filing application to pay the occupational charges as directed by the co-ordinate Bench subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs. 5000/- as cost to be paid to the decree holder within 17.03.2026.

10.

If such cost amount is paid and the receipt to that extent is produced the learned Executing Court will allow the prayer of the present petitioner to deposit of occupational charges as directed by the learned Coordinate Bench.

11.

It is made clear that this extension is allowed only for this month and will not be treated as a precedent or relied upon for seeking any further extension in the event of any subsequent default.

12.

In view of the same the order passed by the learned executing court is modified as above.

13.

The learned Executing Court will proceed further in accordance with law in terms of direction passed by the learned Coordinate Bench.

14.

Accordingly this revisional application is disposed of. 15.

Parties to act on the server copy of this order. (Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.)