IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Before:

The Hon’ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya C.O. 772 of 2025 Dev Sahitya Kutir Private Limited VS.

Sri Sankar Mondal & Ors.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee Mr. Partha Pratim De Mr. Pinaki Brata Ghosh Mr. Abhinaba Roy ….. advocates For the Opposite Party No. 1 : Mr. Shiboproshad Mukherjee, Ld. Sr. Adv.

Ms. Paromita Moitra …. advocates For the Opposite Party No. 2(a) : Mr. Saumyajit Ghosal …. advocate For the Opposite Party No. 2(b) and 2(c) : Mr. Shuvajit Bose …. advocate Reserved on : 10.03.2025 Judgment on : 06.05.2025 Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.:-

1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the first defendant and is directed against an order being no. 71 dated February 6, 2025 passed by the learned judge, Commercial Court at Alipore District 24 Parganas (South) in Title Suit No. 14 of 2021 which was subsequently renumbered as Title Suit (Commercial) No. 25 of 2021.

2. By the order impugned, the cause shown by the defendant nos. 2(b) and 2(c)

was accepted and the order of ex parte hearing of the suit against the said defendants was recalled subject to payment of costs by the said defendants.

3. The Opposite Party no. 1 herein filed a suit praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant no. 1/ petitioner herein and/or its men, agents, servants, assigns, representatives and/or distributors from selling, printing, distributing, publishing and/or exploiting and circulating any books or periodicals or magazines containing the literary or artistic works or stories or characters as mentioned in Annexure H to the plaint and for an order directing an enquiry for the loss and damages suffered by the plaintiff for such wrongful and illegal acts and conducts of the defendants and a decree for damages as well as for delivering up and cancelation of all materials of books or periodicals or magazines containing the literary and artistic works as mentioned in Annexure H or otherwise lying with the defendant no. 1.

4. After entering appearance in the said suit, the petitioner herein contested the same by filing a written statement and in the said written statement has also set up a counter claim. The predecessor-in-interest of the opposite party nos. 2 series appeared in the said suit and filed the written statement on October 7, 2021 along with an application for condonation of delay being IA No. 14 of 2021.

5. In the meantime, the original defendant no. 2 died and the opposite party no. 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) were substituted in place and stead of the original defendant no. 2 by an order dated December 21, 2022.

6. The Opposite Party nos. 2(b) and 2(c) entered appearance in the said suit by filing a vakalatnama on May 19, 2023. The Opposite Party Nos. 2(b) and 2(c) filed an application for adopting the written statement filed by the original defendant no. 2 (since deceased) which was registered as IA No. 20 of 2023. Thereafter, the Opposite Party nos. 2(b) and 2(c) filed an additional written statement on August 3, 2023.

7. The Opposite Party nos. 2(b) and 2(c) were directed to show cause as to why the suit should not be proceeded ex parte against them by an order dated April 24, 2024. The learned Judge of the Commercial Court, by an order dated June 21 of 2024, directed the suit to be proceeded ex parte against the opposite party nos. 2(b) and 2(c).

8. The opposite party nos. 2(b) and 2(c) appeared in the suit on August 13, 2024 and filed a show cause petition which was registered as IA No. 23 of 2024 and an application praying for recalling the order dated June 21, 2024 which was registered as IA No. 24 of 2024. The learned Judge of the Commercial Court, by an order dated February 6, 2025, accepted the cause shown by the opposite party nos. 2(b) and 2(c) and recalled the order of ex parte hearing of the suit subject to payment of cost.

9. Mr. Tanmay Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the pet