w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Alcove Construction Private Limited v/s Lalit Kumar Pransukhka & Others

    C.O. No. 4306 of 2016

    Decided On, 28 November 2016

    At, High Court of Judicature at Calcutta

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY

    For the Petitioner: Anindya Kumar Mitra, Saptangsu Basu, Raja Basu Chowdhury, Chayan Gupta, Abhijit Sarkar, Advocates. For the Respondents: Arnab Roy, Advocate.



Judgment Text

1. This revisional application has been filed by the respondent in Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 pending before the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas. The petitioner has challenged the orders dated September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016 passed by the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas.

By order dated September 27, 2016 passed in C.O. 3740 of 2016, this Court did not interfere with the ex parte ad interim order dated September 08, 2016 passed by the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas but, directed the learned District Judge to pass his fresh decision in the injunction application filed by the plaintiffs opposite parties, only after considering the documents which were to be disclosed by the defendant petitioner by way of an affidavit and by recording the submissions made by the respective parties.

The grievance of the petitioner in this revisional application is that in spite receipt of the said order dated September 27, 2016 and being aware of the direction passed by this Court, the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas passed orders dated September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016 extending the interim order passed on September 08, 2016 without considering the documents disclosed by it in the affidavit filed on September 28, 2016 and without disclosing any reason.

On November 25, 2016 this Court directed the petitioner to serve a copy of this application on the learned advocate representing the plaintiffs opposite parties in the appeal, before the learned Court below and stayed the interim order dated November 16, 2016 till today. The petitioner served a copy of this application, together with a copy of the order dated November 25, 2016 and Mr. Arnab Roy appeared for the opposite parties. He undertook to file his Vokalatnama within the course of the day.

Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the plaintiffs opposite parties could not dispute that on September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016, the learned District Judge at Barasat, North 24-Parganas extended the interim order dated September 08, 2016, which are fresh orders, without complying with the direction passed by this Court on September 27, 2016.

Having considered the materials on record and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, I find it very unfortunate that the learned District Judge, North 24- Parganas, being the head of the District Judiciary, has passed orders dated September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016 in utter disregard of the direction passed by this Court on September 27, 2016. Such conduct on the part of the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas cannot be countenanced. This Court is unable to accept such conduct on the part of the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas, which basically amounts to violation of the order passed by this Court.

For all the foregoing reasons, the revisional application, being C.O. 4306 of 2016, stands allowed. The orders dated September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016 passed by the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas in Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 (Lalit Kumar Pransukhka & Ors. Vs. Alcove Construction Private Limited) stand set aside.

Having considered the above conduct of the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas, I find that this an appropriate case where this Court should suo motu exercise jurisdiction under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to withdraw the above appeal from the Court of the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganaa and transfer the same to the Court of the learned 1st Additional District Judge, North 24-Parganas.

Accordingly, the Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 is withdrawn from the Court of the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas and the same is transferred to the Court of the learned 1st Additional District Judge at Barasat, North 24-Parganas

The learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas is directed to forthwith transmit all the records of the Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 (Lalit Kumar Pransukhka & Ors. Vs. Alcove Construction Private Limited) to the court of the learned 1st Additional District Judge, North 24-parganas so that the learned transferee appellate Court can hear the appeal on November 29, 2016, that is tomorrow in presence of both the sides.

The learned 1st Additional District Judge, North 24-parganas is requested to take up the pending injunction application filed in the Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 for hearing on November 29, 2016 and pass a fresh order in compliance with the directions passed by this Court on September 27, 2016 in C.O. 3740 of 2016. The learned District Judge, North 24 Parganas shall ensure that the records relating to Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016, including the lower Court’s records are transmitted to the Court of learned 1st Additional District Judge by tomorrow before the injunction application is taken up for hearing.

It is made clear that the learned 1st Additional District Judge, North 24 Parganas will be free to pass appropriate order in the injunction application, filed in Misc. Appeal No. 134 of 2016 as per his own wisdom and without being influenced by the grounds mentioned in this order for setting aside the interim orders dated September 29, 2016 and November 16, 2016 passed by the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas.

In view of the this order being passed by this Court in presence of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as respondent respectively in Misc

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

. Appeal No. 134 of 2016, the parties will be entitled to make appropriate submissions before the learned 1st Additional District Judge, North 24-Parganas. With the above directions, C.O. 4306 of 2016 stands disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Let photostat plain copies of this order, duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be handed over to the parties upon usual undertaking. The learned Registrar (Judicial Service) of this Court is requested to forthwith communicate this order to the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas.
O R