Sanjit Jana vs. Chittaranjan Sarkar

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.3315/2022

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-12-2021 in CO No. 568/2021 passed by the High Court at Calcutta)

SANJIT JANA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

CHITTARANJAN SARKAR & ORS. Respondent(s)

(I.A. No.27252/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)

Date : 11-03-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pijush K Roy, Adv. Ms. Kakali Roy, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Rajan K. Chourasia, AOR

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Application for exemption from filing C/C of the impugned judgment is allowed.

Signature Not Verified

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit of 2018 is still at the initial stage and even issues have not been Digitally signed by RASHI GUPTA Date: 2022.03.16 13:26:53 IST Reason:

framed yet. He has drawn our attention to the Order passed by the Division Bench qua the interlocutory proceedings on 15.11.2019 where the injunction against the possession granted by the trial Court was vacated in favour of the petitioner before us. Insofar as injunction against disposing of or alienating or creating any third party interest was concerned, liberty was granted to apply to the trial Court in case of need felt by the petitioner (at pages 210-211).

He has then drawn our attention to page 213 which is the application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to sell 9 satak of land which is stated to be 1/8th of the total land. It is the say of the petitioner that the reason for the same is that the younger daughter of the petitioner has been admitted to a girls School at Kolkata and about 15 lakh amount is required for the said purpose. The business has not been doing well. A sum of Rs. 37 lakh was paid to the plaintiff as a sale consideration of 32 decimal of land both in cash as well as credit to the bank and thus while on one hand the petitioner is out of pocket of that sum, he is not able to deal even with the fraction of the land despite liberty granted by the Division Bench as aforesaid, since the trial Court rejected this application vide an Order dated 11.1.2021 and the revision filed against the same has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 24.12.2021.

In normal circumstances, the aforesaid being interlocutory orders, we would loathe to interfere but in view of what we have set out above, we are inclined to examine the issue.

2

Issue notice returnable in four weeks .

In the meantime, a report is called for from the Civil Judge (SR. DIVN.), 3rd Court, Howrah in title Suit No.507 of 2018 as to what is the stage of the suit and how much time will it take to conclude the trial.

A copy of the Order to accompany notice.

(RASHMI DHYANI) (POONAM VAID) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER