Skip to main content

application for expeditious hearing

 

DISTRICT: SOUTH 24-PARGANAS

 

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

 

C. O.                              of 2016

 

In the Matter of

 

An application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India

 

And

 

In the Matter of

 

Order dated 28th day of June, 2016 passed by the Learned 5th Court of Civil Judge ( Senior Division ) at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, in Money Suit No. 33 of 2013

 

And

In the matter of

 

An application for expeditious hearing of Money Suit No. 33 of 2013

 

And

 

In the Matter of

 

Unnayan ( Survey Park ) Welfare Association, having it’s office at premises being no. 1050 / 1, Survey Park, Santoshpur, Kolkata – 700 075, Police Station – Survey Park, District South 24 Parganas, represented by it’s Authorized person Shri Subhadeep Lahiri, Son of Shri Pulak Lahiri, residing at Dr. B.C. Roy Road, Post Office – South Jagaddal, Police Station – Sonarpur, Pin 700 151, District South 24 Parganas.

 

                     ……  Plaintiff/Petitioner

 

Versus

 

Bengal Rural Welfare Services, represented by Shri Santanu Bhattacharjee, the Secretary, having it’s Registered Office at premises being no. 279, Kendua Main Road, Post Office & Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700 084, District South 24 Parganas.

 

      …………. Defendant /Opposite Party

 

Application Valued at INR 200/-

 

To

The Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice Girish Chandra Gupta Aand His Companion Justices of The said Hon’ble Court

 

 

 

 

 

 

The humble petition of the petitioner above-named Most Respectfully

 

Sheweth: -

 

1.           That the petitioner filed a Money Suit  before The Learned Court of The Civil Judge (Senior Division), 5th  Court at Alipore, District South 24-Parganas,   being Money  Suit No. 33 of  2013, on 25-04-2013.

 

2.           That Your petitioner states that the   defendant entered appearance in the said Money suit as on 08-08-2013, and filed written statement as on 30/05/2014, and thereafter the said suit is still awaiting for framing of issues by the Learned Court.

 

3.           That Your petitioner states that the  petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit in the year 2013, and still awaiting for framing of issues by the Learned Court,   in the said suit proceeding.

 

4.           That Your petitioner state that the petitioner is facing tremendous hardship due to long pendency of the suit.

 

5.           That Your petitioner submits that until and unless the suit is heard expeditiously, Your petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury and will be highly prejudiced.

 

6.           That being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the non-disposal of the suit expeditiously, Your petitioner begs to move Your Lordship for revision on the following amongst other

 

 

 

G R O U N D S

 

 

I.             For that The Learned Court below erroneously exercised Its jurisdiction in not disposing the suit expeditiously.

 

II.           For that the Learned Court below has failed to consider that petitioner is suffering a lot and facing hardship due to delay in disposal of the suit.

 

III.          For that The Learned Trial Court erroneously exercised Its jurisdiction in not disposing of the Suit, and the plaintiff is unnecessarily are using the ploy to drag the same with a view to harass the petitioner.

 

IV.         For that The Learned Court ought not to have given unnecessary adjournments.

 

V.           For that the Orders complained of, if allowed to stand shall occasion the failure of justice and the petitioner shall suffer grave injustice.

 

7.           That the Petitioner crave leave to produce the copy of plaint and written statement, at the time of hearing before the Hon’ble Court.

 

8.           That the Petitioner enclosing herewith the Xerox copy of certified copy of all orders of the said money suit being M.S. no. 33 of 2013, and marked as Annexure – “P-1”, with this petition.

 

9.           That the application is made bona fide and for the ends of justice.

 

 

 

 

Under the above circumstances, Your petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to give necessary directions upon The Learned Civil Judge (Senior  Division), 5th Court at Alipore, District South 24-Parganas, to dispose of the suit being Money Suit No. 33 of 2013, preferably within a period of six months and/or to pass such other further Order/Orders as to Your Lordship may deem fit and proper

 

 

And Your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A F F I D A V I T

I, Sri Subhadeep Lahiri, son of Shri Pulak Lahiri, aged about 34 years, by faith Hindu, by occupation Service residing at Dr. B. C. Roy Road, Post Office – South Jagaddal, Police Statioon – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 151, District South 24 parganas, do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows: -

1.           That I am authorized by the petitioner in the instant application, I am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case and as such I am competent to affirm this affidavit.

 

2.           That the statements made in Paragraph 5 are true to my knowledge and those made in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 are true on the basis of records, and the rest are my humble submissions before This Hon’ble Court.

 

Prepared in my Office

Deponent

 

Identified by me

Advocate

Clerk to:

 

 

 

Advocate

Solemnly affirmed before me the………. day of August, 2016

 

 

C O M M I S S I O N E R

 

 
DISTRICT: SOUTH 24-PARGANAS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

 

C. O. No.                      of 2016

 

In the Matter of

Unnayan ( Survey Park ) Welfare Association

                      ……  Plaintiff/Petitioner

Versus

Bengal Rural Welfare Services

          …………Defendant/Opposite Party

 

 

An application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India

 

Ashok Kumar Singh,

Advocate,

Bar Association,

Room No. 15,

High Court, Calcutta

Mobile No.  9883070666

 

 

 

 

VAKALATNAMA

District : South 24 Parganas.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

C.O. no. ____________of 2016.

Unnayan ( Survey Park ) Welfare Association                 ___________Petitioner.

-          Versus –

 

Bengal Rural Welfare Services.                                   ____________Opposite Party.

KNOW ALL MEN by these presents that I / We Shri Subhadeep Lahiri, Son of Shri Pulak Lahiri, residing at Dr. B.C. Roy Road, Post Office – South Jagaddal, Police Station – Sonarpur, Pin 700 151, District South 24 Parganas, representing, Unnayan ( Survey Park ) Welfare Association, having it’s office at premises being no. 1050 / 1, Survey Park, Santoshpur, Kolkata – 700 075, Police Station – Survey Park, District South 24 Parganas,

   do hereby constitute and appoint the under mentioned Advocate, Pleader, Vakils, jointly and each of them severally to be pleader of take such steps and proceedings as may be necessary on my / our behalf and for that purpose to make sign, verify and present all necessary petitions, plaints, written statements and other documents and do nominate and appoint or retain senior counsels, vakil, advocates and other persons, lodge and deposits moneys and documents and other papers in the Ld. Court and the same again withdraw and to take out of Court and to obtain or grant as the case may be effectual receipts and discharge for the same and for all moneys which may be payable to me / us in the premises. To enter into compromise with my / our approval and withdraw, all moneys from the court AND GENERALLY  to act in the premises and proceedings arising there out whether by way of execution, review, appeal, or otherwise or in any manner contested there with as effectually and to all intents and purpose as I / We could act if personally present and such substitution and as pleasure to revoke I / We hereby ratifying and agreeing to confirm whatever may be lawfully done by virtue hereof.

In witness whereof this Vakalatnama has been executed by me / us.

This the …………………day of ………………2016.

Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate. High Court Bar Association Room No. 15, High Court at Calcutta. Sri Sandip Roy Chowdhury, Advocate. High Court Bar Association Room No. 2, High Court at Calcutta. Sri Apurba Mondal, Advocate. Advocate, Alipore Judges & Criminal Court, Alipore, Kolkata – 700 027.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OBJECTIONS OF RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER

  OBJECTIONS OF 2ND TO 4TH RESPONDENTS TO DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER:- 1. The interim application is not maintainable since the affidavit accompanied the application does not speaks truth and its vague and not specific in disclosing accurate reasons for the absence of petitioner/plaintiff in the days wherein court has scheduled to plaintiff evidence. 2. The affidavit consist of mere allegations un-supported by documents, hence liable to be dismissed. The written statement and objections filed by these respondents to the main petition be read as part and parcel of this objections to delay condonation application. 3. The matter of condonation of delay, it is an established position that every day's delay has to be explained and a person who seeks the exercise of the discretion to condone the delay in his favour cannot run away by making a mere general statement or mere allegation unsupported by document or mere passing of his laches upon his advocate. 4...

"As Is" and "As Available"

  " As Is" and "As Available " " As available " applies to goods and services, including those provided online. ... With apps and websites, " As Available " indicates contractual standards only when the product or service is available. “As Is” alerts a buyer in a sales contract that they accept the purchased item, be it real estate, animals, automobiles or appliances, in its present condition. It also assumes the buyer has a right to inspect the property first so they can assess any defects and make an informed decision. “As available” applies to goods and services, including those provided online. At its most simple definition, it refers to products in stock or real estate that remain on the market. Once purchased, there are no guarantees because the product is no longer available. It also refers to store or office hours with a bricks-and-mortar business. With apps and websites, “As Available” indicates contractual standards only when the produc...

Quashing a False 498a FIR

  Quashing a False 498a FIR Quashing of FIR is a tough matter ! Courts generally are reluctant to interfere at the stage of investigation and only very strong grounds + persuasive arguments can make a bench sit up and taking a 482 matter seriously. FIR’s can be quashed if they an abuse of process of law/prima facie don’t disclose any offence or are inherently improbable - If you are thinking about quashing of FIR u/s 498a/406. These are the grounds/list of judgments of quashing that would help bolster your plea : GROUNDS FOR QUASHING IN A 498a/406/34 IPC MATTER • BECAUSE  Section 482 of the Cr.PC  categorically saves the inherent power of High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case it is pertinent in the ends of justice and to prevent an abuse of the process of law that the impugned FIR be quashed. • BECAUSE ...