Debabrata Chatterjee & Ors. vs Sunil Karmakar

The present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the plaintiffs in a suit for eviction of licensee. In such suit,

the defendant/opposite party took a defence of tenancy. The opposite party also made an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil

Procedure for rejection of the plaint.

The ground of such application was that no such suit could be filed without prior notice as contemplated in the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act,

1997. Such application for rejection of plaint having been rejected, a revisional application, bearing Civil Revision Case No. 18 of 2016, was preferred

before the District Judge at Alipore, which is now pending before the Additional District Judge, Eleventh Court at Alipore.

In such revisional application, an order was passed permitting the suit to proceed, but staying any final decree from being passed. Although such stay

order was passed on contest, apparently neither side communicated the order to the trial court. As a consequence, the suit itself was disposed of in the

form of dismissal.

Challenging such dismissal of suit, the present petitioners preferred an appeal, bearing Title Apple No. 190 of 2017, which is also pending. It is

submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the appeal court is not proceeding with the hearing of the appeal in view of pendency of Civil Revision Case

No. 18 of 2016.

The predicament of the petitioners is apparently that although the records of the suit are with the appellate court, the revisional court is insisting upon

arrival of the lower court records prior to disposal of the revisional application. In view of nature of the order proposed to be passed, no prior notice on

the opposite party is deemed necessary.

There does not appear to be any justification either on the part of the appellate court to insist upon the result of the revisional application, since there is

fatter on the appellate court to proceed with the appeal despite the order of stay of final decree passed in respect of the title suit, or on the part of the

revisional court in insisting upon the lower court records, since only relevant document for deciding the said revision can be a copy of the plaint of the

suit.

In the circumstances, C.O. No. 785 of 2018 is disposed of by requesting the Additional District Judge, Eleventh Court at Alipore to dispose of Civil

Revision Case No. 18 of 2016 pending before him as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either side, but in any

event before July 31, 2018. It is made clear that while disposing of the said revisional application, the revisional court will not insist upon arrival of

lower court records as such records completely unnecessary for the disposal of the revisional application.

The petitioners will communicate the instant order at the earliest to the revisional court as well as the opposite party. There will be no order as to

costs.