Subrata Chatterjee vs. Bidhan Singha Roy

ITEM NO.44

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) $No(s)$ . 23625/2023

COURT NO.7

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-09-2023 in CO No. 1779/2023 passed by the High Court at Calcutta]

SUBRATA CHATTERJEE & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

SECTION XVI

VERSUS

BIDHAN SINGHA ROY & ORS.

Date: 20-01-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.

• HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
• For Petitioner(s): Mr. Pravin Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. K.N. Jana, Adv. Mr. Smarhar Singh, AOR
• For Respondent(s) : Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Singha Rov, Adv. Ms. Manisha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Shubhankar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Rathor, Adv. Mr. Reegan S Bel, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kushwaha, Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Arising out of an order passed by the High Court rejecting $1.$ the Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as maintainable with an observation that the recourse

Respondent $(s)$

against the order of the trial court is available under Order XLIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the present Special Leave Petition has been filed.

2. During the hearing, it has been brought to our notice that after passing an order of injunction, petitioners have filed two applications. One is under Order XXXIX, Rule 2A which is pending and the other one is the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure on which the trial Court as well as the High Court has passed the orders and the present litigation is persuading to the same.

3. In the facts of this case, after grant of the injunction, an application for breach of injunction is pending. The petitioner ought to have pressed the said application and the court ought to have decided the same as expeditiously as possible. At present, we are not inclined to interfere in the order impugned or to embark upon the findings recorded by the High Court. However, it is open to the petitioner that after decision on the application under Order XXXIX, Rule 2A, the recourse, as permissible under the law, may be resorted to.

4. In view of the foregoing observations, the present Special Leave Petition stand disposed of.

2

5. We hope and trust that the trial Court shall decide the application under Order XXXIX, Rule 2A as early as possible.

6. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (NAND KISHOR) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER