Appellant Vs. Respondent

Appellant vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Aug 13, 2014

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1161318

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/1161318
Court: Kolkata High Court
Judge: Arijit Banerjee
Decided On: Aug 13, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Appellant

Respondent

Excerpt

.....the possession of the plaintiff till 28th orders whichever is earlier. february, 2014 or until further a similar assurance is given on behalf of the learned counsel for the plaintiff. i order status-quo accordingly.” today mr.moloy ghosh, learned senior counsel appearing for the plaintiff prays for an order in terms of prayers (a) and (c) of the petition. i have heard mr.ghosh and mr.jayanta kumar mitra, learned senior advocate appearing for the defendant at length. i think interest of justice will be sub-served if there be an interim order of injunction restraining both the plaintiff and the defendant and their men, servants, agents, assigns, broker, employees or allies from selling, alienating, transferring, encumbering or in any way dealing with the suit property in the facts and circumstances of this case. injunction restraining the defendant there would also be an order of and his men, servants, agents, assigns, employees or allies from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession of the suit premises. this order will continue till the disposal of the suit. let the defendant file his written statement within five weeks from date. let there be discovery of documents within a fortnight after reopening of court after the long vacation. inspection forthwith. the parties would be at liberty to mention the suit before the appropriate court for early hearing. the application is thus disposed of. (arijit banerjee, j.) msen

Full Judgment

ORDER

SHEET GA No.33 of 2014 With CS No.456 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DR.

AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJ.Versus DR.

SANJAY KUMAR MUKHERJEE Petitioner Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 13th August, 2014.

For Petitioner : Mr.Moloy Ghosh, Sr.Advocate : Mr.D.Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Saunak Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Avijit Dey, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Sr.Advocate Mr.S.Chakaraborty, Advocate Mr.Arun Kumar Das, Advocate The Court : This is a fight between two brotheRs.The plaintiff, the elder brother has filed a suit for partition of Premises No.12, Beadon Street, Kolkata-6.

In the said suit the plaintiff took out the present application wherein an order dated 23rd December, 2013 was passed by I.P.Mookerji, J inter alia to the following effect : “In this tussle between the two brothers regarding title and possession I record the assurance given by the learned Counsel for the defendant Mr.Jahar Chakraborty that his client will not transfer, encumber or part with possession of the property.

Neither, will he interfere with the possession of the plaintiff till 28th orders whichever is earlier.

February, 2014 or until further A similar assurance is given on behalf of the learned Counsel for the plaintiff.

I order status-quo accordingly.” Today Mr.Moloy Ghosh, learned Senior counsel appearing for the plaintiff prays for an order in terms of prayers (a) and (c) of the petition.

I have heard Mr.Ghosh and Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the defendant at length.

I think interest of justice will be sub-served if there be an interim order of injunction restraining both the plaintiff and the defendant and their men, servants, agents, assigns, broker, employees or allies from selling, alienating, transferring, encumbering or in any way dealing with the suit property in the facts and circumstances of this case.

injunction restraining the defendant There would also be an order of and his men, servants, agents, assigns, employees or allies from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession of the suit premises.

This order will continue till the disposal of the suit.

Let the defendant file his written statement within five weeks from date.

Let there be discovery of documents within a fortnight after reopening of Court after the long vacation.

Inspection forthwith.

The parties would be at liberty to mention the suit before the appropriate Court for early hearing.

The application is thus disposed of.

(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) msen

Same Court & Year Kolkata · 2014 Same Parties Appellant vs Respondent Same Subject Education Same Judge Arijit Banerjee