Sm.Pramila Devi Shaw Vs. Bijay Kumar Rathi and ors.

Sm.Pramila Devi Shaw vs Bijay Kumar Rathi and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided May 10, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1058985

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1058985
Court: Kolkata High Court
Judge: Soumen Sen
Decided On: May 10, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sm.Pramila Devi Shaw

Respondent

Bijay Kumar Rathi and ors.

Excerpt

.....till the suit is finally heard and disposed of. the said possession of the plaintiffs would not create any equity in favour of the said plaintiffs. the petitioners in this proceeding have taken repeated adjournments in order to make necessary arrangement to accommodate the decree-holder/plaintiffs in the said premises. however, till date the said assurance was not given effect to. the plaintiffs cannot be denied the fruit of the litigation. the suit was filed in the year 2000 and the decree was passed on 11th june,2012. the plaintiffs cannot be made to dance to the tune and whims of the judgement-debt ors.mr.s.talukdar,learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant 1 series submits that the time may be given till 16th may,2013 within which the decreeholder would be either restored to their original possession or would be provided with a suitable accommodation from which they could continue their business without creating any equity in their favour. in view thereof, let this application appear on 17th may,2013. all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this usual undertakings. (soumen sen, j.) s.chandra ar(cr) order on the

Full Judgment

GA No.82 of 2013 CS 18.of 2000 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE SM.PRAMILA DEVI SHAW Versus BIJAY KUMAR RATHI & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :

10. h May, 2013.

Mr.S.Talukdar,Sr.Advocate appeaRs.Ms.H.Chakraborty,Advocate appeaRs.Ms.Ahana Sikdar,Advocate appeaRs.The Court :- This is an application filed by the judgement-debtor 1 series for condonation of delay and recalling of the judgment and decree dated 11th June,2012.

This matter was heard from time to time.

By an order dated 20th March,2013, the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the decree-holder without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties to the suit.

In terms of the said decree, the plaintiff is entitled to restoration of possession.

The defendants have taken out an application for execution of the said decree dated 11th June,2012 in which Receivers have been appointed.

When this matter was taken up on earlier occasions, this Court observed that the defendant should be restored to their original possession and continue to remain in possession till the suit is finally heard and disposed of.

The said possession of the plaintiffs would not create any equity in favour of the said plaintiffs.

The petitioners in this proceeding have taken repeated adjournments in order to make necessary arrangement to accommodate the decree-holder/plaintiffs in the said premises.

However, till date the said assurance was not given effect to.

The plaintiffs cannot be denied the fruit of the litigation.

The suit was filed in the year 2000 and the decree was passed on 11th June,2012.

The plaintiffs cannot be made to dance to the tune and whims of the judgement-debt ORS.Mr.S.Talukdar,learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant 1 series submits that the time may be given till 16th May,2013 within which the decreeholder would be either restored to their original possession or would be provided with a suitable accommodation from which they could continue their business without creating any equity in their favour.

In view thereof, let this application appear on 17th May,2013.

All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this usual undertakings.

(SOUMEN SEN, J.) S.Chandra AR(CR) order on the

Same Court & Year Kolkata · 2013 Same Parties Sm.Pramila Devi Shaw vs Bijay Kumar Rathi and ors. Same Subject Education Same Judge Soumen Sen