Sabita Barai v. Sagarika Dey

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

CO/37/2023 Smt. Sabita Barai ... Petitioner Vs.

Smt. Sagarika Dey ...Opposite Party Mrs. Anjili Nag ... for the Petitioner Mr. Prohit Mohan Lall ...for the Opposite Party August 17, 2023 [M.A.Mobin] Item No.4 The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the Title Suit No. 56 of 2018 which has been renumbered as Title Suit No.186 of 2019 on transfer to the Court of Learned Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Port Blair is pending for adjudication for the report of the Commissioner yet to be submitted since 8th February, 2021. She prays for expeditious hearing of the suit.

The learned Advocate for the respondent has filed a fresh Vakalatnama to be kept on record. The learned Advocate for the respondent seeks for expeditious hearing of the suit. His main contention lies in the fact that the provision under Order 39 Rule 7 cannot be exclusively dealt in isolation with the provision under Order 39 Rule 1 and

2. Considerable period of nearly more than five years has expired since the Commissioner report was directed to be submitted. The Commissioner appointed by the Court had filed a part report and thereafter on the basis of a

subsequent development writ was re-issued for further commission. The learned Trial Court is to take necessary measures so that the Commissioner's report is filed within a period of one month on the application by the petitioner/defendant within a week from passing of this order. The learned Trial Court is further requested to dispose of the Title Suit as stated above within a period of one year.

The CO No.37 of 2023 is disposed of.

(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)