JUDGMENT :

1. Subject-matter of challenge in this case is against the rejection of an application under Section 24 of the C.P.C. passed by learned District Judge, Hooghly, in Misc. Case No.3 of 2022.

2. Admittedly, in a suit for declaration and injunction petitioners are defendants, while plaintiff/opposite party is being represented by his Sebait namely, Sri Bholanath Roy, learned advocate, practising at Arambagh Court.

3. Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners/defendants submits that in spite of making engagement of a learned lawyer, for and on behalf of the defendants from the bar of Arambagh Court, the advocate already appointed for the defendants declined to participate in hearing process upon viewing presence of Mr. Bholanath Roy, learned advocate a renowned practitioner of Arambagh Court.

4. Drawing attention to an affidavit submitted before the court below, Mr. Mukherjee submits that manner of conducting a case by learned advocate representing plaintiff, may be one of the causes, for absence of learned advocate for the petitioners to take part in the hearing process of a particular case.

5. Mr. Mukherjee further submits that there is another case of M