The Holy Angel Social Reforms And ANR v. Shri M.Hassan Koya

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/18/2025 The Holy Angel Social Reforms and Another Vs.

Shri M. Hassan Koya Mr. K. M. B. Jayapal .... for the petitioner Ms. A. S. Zinu ... for the opposite party July 03, 2026 [AKB] Item No.1 1.

This revisional application is directed against an order dated February 6, 2025 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Port Blair, South Andaman in Other Execution Case No. 10 of 2018 whereby the learned Executing Court recorded that unless, an order of stay is granted by the Appellate Court, the execution case would proceed. 2.

The opposite party herein had instituted Title Suit No. 65 of 2014 against the petitioners before the learned Civil Judge Senior Division), Andaman and Nicobar Islands at Port Blair praying inter alia for a decree for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent and for damages. The said suit was decreed exparte on January 11, 2018. 3.

Being aggrieved thereby the petitioners filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying for setting aside the said ex-parte decree. The same was registered as Misc. Judicial Case No. 28 of 2019.

4.

In the meantime, the opposite party put the ex-parte decree in execution by filing Other Execution Case No. 10 of 2018.

5.

Subsequently, the application for setting aside ex-parte decree was rejected by the Learned Trial Court on April 26, 2024.

6.

The petitioner carried the said order of dismissal of the application for setting aside ex-parte decree in appeal being Other Appeal No. 26 of 2024 before the Learned District Judge. In the said appeal, the petitioner also filed an application under Order XLI Rule 5 of the Code for stay of the execution case. However, the said appeal and the connected application could not be taken up by the Learned Appellate Court in view of an order dated October 19, 2023 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Robin Bagchi - versus - M. Joy and others (FAT 3 of 2022) wherein it was held that the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judge of Andaman and Nicobar Islands at Port Blair was only upto the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/- and not beyond.

7.

The order passed in FAT 3 of 2022 has been challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said SLP is said to be pending.

8.

However, upon another Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court differing with the view taken by the Hon'ble Division Bench in Robin Bagchi (Supra) a reference was made to a Larger Bench on the point as to whether or not the learned District Judge at Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands has

unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction to hear appeals from all judgments, decrees and final orders of all sub-ordinate Courts within the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

9.

Such reference has been decided by the Larger Bench on March 9, 2026 by holding that the Learned District Judge, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands has unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction to hear all appeals irrespective of valuation, from judgments, decrees and final orders passed by every Civil Court under the District Court within the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

10.

In view of the decision of the Larger Bench, this Court does not find any reason to keep the present revisional application pending inasmuch as, presently there is no embargo on the Learned Appellate Court to hear out the petitioner's appeal and the connected application for stay pending before him.

11.

It is noted that the initial interim order had been passed earlier by this Court in a situation where the petitioners were found to be virtually remediless as their appeal was kept pending. Since it has been found by the Larger Bench that the Learned District Judge i.e. the Appellate Court has pecuniary jurisdiction to decide the petitioner's appeal, such situation is no longer obtaining. The Learned Appellate Court will now decide the petitioners' application for stay on its own merits. 12.

Mr. Jayapal apprehends that the petitioners would be without protection, if the revisional application is disposed of since with such disposal the interim order would also get

vacated. Such apprehension is not misplaced. This Court notes that the interim order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court has been in operation upon being extended from time to time.

13.

Since this revisional application is being disposed of, this Courts directs that the interim order of stay of other Execution Case No. 10 of 2018 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Port Blair shall continue for a further period of one month from date.

14.

The petitioners and/or the opposite party shall communicate this order to the Learned Appellate Court for the Learned Appellate Court to take up the petitioner's application for stay and deal with the same in accordance with law. 15.

It is clarified that the Learned Appellate Court will not be guided by the interim order of stay of execution granted by this Court in the peculiar fact situation which was previously obtaining as already indicated hereinabove. The Learned Appellate Court shall grant fresh interim order or extend the interim order passed by this Court only in case the Learned Appellate Court is satisfied upon hearing both parties that a prima face case therefor has been made out in accordance with law and not otherwise. The Learned Appellate Court shall not routinely extend the interim order and shall obviously be free to impose such conditions as it deems fit and proper as per law. 16.

The parties shall be free to put forth their respective cases before the Learned Appellate Court which shall be considered by the Learned Appellate Court in accordance with law for

passing appropriate orders. Learned Appellate Court is requested to dispose of the application under Order XLI Rule 5 of the Code as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order.

CO/18/2025 is stands disposed of. No costs.

(Om Narayan Rai, J.)