✦ Calcutta High Court

(S. Banerjee) CO 1866 of 2024 Fortune Township Association of Apartment Owners & Ors. v. Deepak Kumar Mazumdar & Ors.

HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Ms. Sarmila Das Mr. D. Mukhopadhyay Mr. N. Khanra …for the petitioners …for the opposite parties This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendants praying for a direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), 1st Court at Barasat in Title Suit No. 1047 of 2023 expeditiously. The learned advocate for the opposite parties is present. From the order-sheets appended to this application this court finds that an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code is still pending. Learned advocate appearing for the opposite parties submits that talks of settlement is going on between the parties. 2 In the light of the submissions made by the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, CO 1866 of 2024 stands disposed of by requesting the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), 1st Court at Barasat to make an endeavour to dispose of the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. Depending on the fate of the aforesaid application, the learned trial judge shall proceed in accordance with law. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments