Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 211 (CAL)

Central Bank of India v. Sajal Biswas

2018-02-01

HARISH TANDON

body2018
JUDGMENT : Harish Tandon, J. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the defendant no.1/petitioner seeking direction upon the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 5th Court, Alipore to dispose of an application for vacating the interim order and an application for rejection of the plaint expeditiously. 2. The defendant no.1/petitioner has been impleaded in the suit as they have issued a statutory notice under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act.). The plaintiff/opposite party claimed tenancy in respect of the suit premises under the defendant no. 2, who according to the petitioner is a borrower and his account has been declared as non-performing asset. 3. The Trial Court passed an ex-parte ad interim order of injunction against the defendants and after receiving the copy thereof the petitioner has filed not only the applications for vacating the said ad interim order of injunction but also rejection of the plaint, as the jurisdiction of the Civil Court has been barred under Section 34 of the said Act. 4. My attention is drawn to the orders passed in the said suit and it is really surprising that the Court is adjourning the matter on one pretext or another and there is no reflection in the order sheets that any date for hearing of the said application has been fixed. 5. Since a plea of maintainability of the suit, being barred under the provisions of the Special Act, is taken in an application for rejection of the plaint, this Court directs the Trial Court to fix the date for hearing of the said application, which shall not exceed two weeks from the date of the communication of this order in presence of the respective parties or their counsels. 6. The Trial Court shall dispose of the said application within three weeks therefrom by recording proper reasons and it goes without saying that an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties shall be given. 7. The revisional application is thus disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.