IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury C.O. 1397 of 2024 Sri Kallol Das VERSUS Smt. Sipra Bose For the petitioner: Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. Anant Kumar Shaw, Adv.

Mr. Souvik Das, Adv.

For the Opposite Party Mr. Soumava Sartia, Adv.

Ms. Sarmistha Ghosh Sarma, Adv. Mr. Rajiblochan Chakraborty, Adv.

Ms. Vaswati Chakraborty, Adv.

Mr. Priyanjit Kundu, Adv.

Last Heard on: March 17, 2025 Judgment on: April 25, 2025 Biswaroop Chowdhury,J:

The petitioner before this Court is a decree holder in an Execution Case being Title Execution Case No-07 of 2023 arising out of judgment and decree dated 4th January 2023 passed in Title Suit No. 57 of 2017 pending before Learned Civil Judge Junior Division Bidhannagar. The petitioner being aggrieved by an order dated 15-03-2024 in an application under Order IX. Rule 13 CPC being Misc Case no-11 of 2024 granting stay of Title Execution Case 7 of 2023 along with Misc Case 44 of 2023 (in connection with Title Suit No. 57 of 2017) has come up with the instant application.

The case of the opposite party/judgment debtor in application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure may be summed up thus:

1. The judgment debtor is occupying and enjoying all that piece and parcel of shop room measuring about 180 sq Ft lying and situated at holding 11/1 Nirmal Sengupta Sarani, under Ward No. 5 within the limits of the Dum-Dum Municipality under Police Station Dum-Dum District-North

24 Parganas Kolkata – 700079.

2. The Judgment Debtor is carrying on business in the decretal property since 1998 with the permission of her mother Padma Rani Das and during her lifetime it was her desire that the Petitioner shall enjoy and occupy shop as absolute owner after her death. The judgment debtor being an aged widow and her sons having no other income is dependent upon the said shop.

3. The decree-holder have fraudulently obtained a deed of gift in his favour from the said Padma Rani Dasi taking advantage of her age.

4. The judgment debtor challenged the authenticity of the said deed and thereafter the decree-holder along with two local developers being supported by the antisocial threatened her to vacate the shop room.

5. The decree holder filed a Title Suit before the Learned Civil Judge Junior Division 3rd Court Sealdah. The judgment debtor received the summons and appeared before the Learned Court and also filed her written statement along with Counter claim against the Title Suit No. 57/2017. Thereafter the said matter was transferred to the Learned Civil Judge Junior Division Bidhan Nagar for disposal but the judgment debtor did not receive any information from the Learned conducting Advocate namely Anup Kundu and as such could not contest the matter. No notice was also served from the Learned Court and the judgment debtor was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing on 09-03-2022 when the suit was fixed ex-parte against the petitioner.

6. The judgment debtor being an aged lady lost the track of the matter and was waiting for the information from the end of the conducting Advocate, but never received the same.

7. The Learned Advocate of the judgment debtor stopped contacting her and due to her age it was not possible for her to visit the Court in regular manner to get the whereabouts of the matter.

8. One person came to the shop of the judgment debtor and directed her to vacate the shop the decree holder along with his men and agents also accompanied him. The said person without showing any order stated that he has been sent from Court for vacating the shop. The judgment debtor being an aged lady could not understand the same.

9. That soon thereafter the judgment debtor rushed to the Sealdah Court and enquired about the matter but returned empty handed. Moreover the judgment debtor could not contact the Learned Advocate conducting the matter.

10. The judgment debtor thereafter received a summon from the Court of the Learned Civil Judge