AD-61 Ct No.16

13.01.2026 (SSS)

FMA 1715 of 2025 with CAN 1 of 2025 Hisabuddin Sk.

Vs.

Murshed Ali Seikh alias Mursid Seikh and Ors.

Mr. Partha Pratim Roy, Ms. Poulami Chakraborty, Mr. Samrat Chakraborty, Mr. Saikat Gayen ….For the appellant.

1. The present challenge has been preferred against an order whereby temporary injunction was granted in favour of the respondents, thereby disposing of the injunction application filed in a partition suit by the plaintiffs/respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant/appellant argues that despite the learned Trial Judge having taken into consideration the fact that the vendors of the respective parties to the present suit had effected a valid partition between themselves by way of a partition deed and transferred such separate portions to the parties respectively, the learned Trial Judge came to the conclusion that since the boundaries of those plots had been mentioned only as agricultural lands without any specific mentioning of the plot numbers or the names of owners of the adjoining lands, at this stage it cannot be held that the demarcations of the portions are proper.

3. It is argued that such premise is erroneous in law in view of the properties being admittedly separate and having been separate from the inception, by dint of the partition deed executed between the vendors of the respective parties.

4. Secondly, it is argued that the defendant/appellant had already made construction on his own occupied separate portion of the suit property up to the first floor level and was on the verge of constructing the second floor when the injunction was granted. As such, it is submitted, there is no scope of lateral or horizontal extension of the construction, even if permitted, thereby encroaching upon the portion of the defendants, and as such, the learned Trial Judge failed to take into consideration equitable principles in restraining the defendant/appellant from making further constructions at this belated stage.

5. The appeal is required to be heard on the above questions and the other grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal and is accordingly admitted.

6. The appellant shall serve copies of the memorandum of appeal and CAN 1 of 2025 on the plaintiffs/respondent nos. 1 and 2, indicating that the matter shall be listed under the heading “Application” on February 16, 2026. Affidavit-in- opposition, if any, shall be filed within three weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter.

7. Service of copies of notice on defendant nos. 3 to 19/proforma respondents is dispensed with in view of no relief having been sought in the appeal against the said proforma respondents.

8. The defendant/appellant will be at liberty to file a compilation of further documents which were before the Trial Court at the time of hearing of the application. In such event, the appellant shall serve a copy of such compilation along with the present application and the memorandum in advance on the plaintiffs/respondents.