Manoj Lala v. Rajendra Kumar Samsukha and 10 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010289282023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCRP(IO)/437/2023o MANOJoLALAo S/OoLATEoMOHANoLALoLALA,oR/OoCENTRALoROAD,oSILCHAR,oP.O.- SILCHAR,oDIST-CACHAR,oASSAM-788001 VERSUSo RAJENDRAoKUMARoSAMSUKHAoANDo10oORSo S/OoLATEoABHAYoCHANDRAoSAMSUKHA,oCENTRALoROAD,oP.O.oANDoP.S.- SILCHAR,oDIST-CACHAR,oASSAM,oPIN-788001 2:GOURAoCHAKRABORTY oS/OoLATEoGISPATIoNARAYANoCHAKRABORTY oASSAM oPIN-788001 3:BARNALIoMAZUMDER oD/OoSRIoRAMAKANTAoMAZUMDER oASSAM oPIN-788001 4:MITRAoROY oW/OoLATEoSWAPANoROYo@oSWAPANoKUMARoROY oLINKoROADoSILCHAR oASSAM-788001 PageoNo.#o2/5 5:RAJoRUPAoROY oD/OoLATEoSWAPANoKUMARoROY oW/OoSAMIRoBHATTACHARJEE oFLAToNO.o406 oWESToENDoAPARTMENT oMONDAPUR oGOCHIBOWLI oHYDERABAD-500084 oDULYoREPRESENTEDoBYoHERoCONSTITUTEDoATTORNEYo(MOTHER)oVIDEo POWERoOFoATTORNEYoNO.o815oDATEDo30/10/2019 oMITRAoROY oW/OoSWAPANoROYo@oSWAPANoKUMARoROY oLINKoROAD oSILCHAR oASSAM oP/R/AoC/OoPRINCEoTAILOR oASSAM oPIN-788001 6:DEBARUPAoROY oD/OoLATEoSWAPANoKUMARoROY oW/OoJOYDEEPoCHAKRABORTY oFLAToNO.o708 oF-30 oSECTORo50 oNOIDA-201301o(U.P) oDULYoREPRESENTEDoBYoHERoCONSTITUTEDoATTORNEYo(MOTHER)oVIDEo POWERoOFoATTORNEYoNO.o815oDATEDo30/10/2019 oMITRAoROY oW/OoSWAPANoROYo@oSWAPANoKUMARoROY oLINKoROAD oSILCHAR oASSAM oP/R/AoC/OoPRINCEoTAILOR oASSAM oPIN-788001 7:RANJIToKUMARoDAS PageoNo.#o3/5 oR/OoWESToNORSINGoROAD oAMBICAPATTY oSILCHAR-788004 8:PRANABoDAoSGUPTA oR/OoNAGNAHAoLANE oASSAM-788001 9:JUMURoROY oR/OoULLASKARoDUTTAoSARANI oJAILoROAD oASSAM-788004 10:NUPURoROY oR/OoNUTANoPATTY oSILCHAR oASSAM-788001.oSONSoANDoDAUGHTERSoOFoLATEoPHANIoBHUSANoDASo GUPTA 11:RATHINDRAoDAS oS/OoLATEoROMAPADAoDAS oC/OoRASTRIYOoSONGBADoSANGSTHA oSILCHAR oASSAM-78800o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oBoCHAKRAVARTYo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ::kBEFOREk::k HON'BLEkMR.kJUSTICEkPARTHIVJYOTIkSAIKIA kOkkkRkkkDkkkEkkkR o

03.01.2024 Heard Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Page No.# 4/5 This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction of this Court asking the trial court to dispose of Misc.

(J) Case No.13/2023 (arising out of Title Suit No.06/2023) according to mandate of Order 39 Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). On 27.01.2023, in a petition under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC, the trial court passed an order directing both sides of the case to maintain status quo over the suit Schedule-I land until further orders. This direction was passed without hearing the opposite party of the case. The trial court opined that if such an order is not passed and construction is allowed to proceed, the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of the petitioner. The said direction asking the parties to maintain status quo amounts to an order of injunction. Therefore, the Order 39 Rule 3A of the Code will be applicable in that case. The Order 39 Rule 3A reads as under: "3A. Court to dispose of application for injunction within thirty days. – Where an injunction has been granted without giving notice to the opposite party, the Court shall make an endeavour to finally dispose of the application within thirty days from the date on which the injunction was granted; and where it is unable so to do, it shall record its reasons for such inability." Therefore, the said Misc. (J) Case No.13/2023 should have been disposed of within thirty days of passing the status quo order. But that was not done. The learned trial court is directed to dispose of the Misc. (J) Case Page No.# 5/5 No.13/2023 within thirty days of receiving the copy of this order. The petitioner is given the liberty to submit a copy of this direction to the learned trial court. With the aforesaid direction, the revision petition is disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant