✦ Calcutta High Court

D/L- 20 v. Sk. Abdul Mohit

HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Case at a glance

Judgment

Mr. Biswajit De Mr. Subhajit De Ms. Mallika Manna .…for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff praying for a direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), 1st Court at Paschim Medinipur to dispose of the application under Section 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 filed in O.S. No.250 of 2012 expeditiously. Mr. De, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the said application is pending since the year 2024. In view of the order sought and proposed to be passed this Court feels that there is no necessity to direct issuance of any notice upon the opposite parties. However, the learned advocate for the petitioner shall be obliged to forward a copy of this application along with this order upon the opposite parties or the learned advocates representing the opposite parties before the learned trial judge. 2 Mr. De, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that hearing of the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act is fixed on November 21,

2025. He further submits that the said application is otherwise ready for hearing. In the light of the submission made by the learned advocate for the petitioner, CO 3427 of 2025 stands disposed of by requesting the learned Judge Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), 1st Court at Paschim Medinipur to take up the hearing of the application under Section 7(3) of the 1997 Act on the next date fixed i.e. on November 21, 2025, if the same is otherwise ready for hearing and to make an endeavour to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. There will be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

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