C.O. 4383 of 2007. Case: Arati Rani Dutta Vs Janab Aiatullah Sk. and Ors.. High Court of Calcutta (India)
| Case Number | C.O. 4383 of 2007 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Partha Pratim Ray and Dyutiman Banerjee, Advs. |
| Judges | Debi Prosad Dey, J. |
| Issue | Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order I Rule 10; Constitution of India - Article 227; West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 - Section 8 |
| Judgement Date | March 24, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Calcutta (India) |
Judgment:
Debi Prosad Dey, J.
-
Affidavit of service be kept on the record.
-
Challenge in this revisional application is the order passed by learned Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.), 2nd Court, Kandi in Misc. Case No. 68 of 1990 No. 77 date 23.07.2007 wherein and whereby learned Judge has allowed the application under order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and permitted the petitioner Janab Aiatullah Sk to be a party in the said misc. case.
-
No one appears on behalf of the opposite parties despite service of notice.
-
Learned Advocate Mr. Partha Pratim Roy submits that an application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act was filed before the learned Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.) for preemption of a particular plot of land. Therefore, the matter of such preemption is within limited jurisdiction of trial Court to decide between the parties. Curiously enough one Janab Aiatullah Sk filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded in the said proceeding on the ground that the property covered by that misc. case along with some other properties was vested to the Wakf Board on the strength of registered deed No. 358 dated 8th February, 1937. The applicants specifically pleaded in the said application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code that the petitioner along with his brothers become mutuwali of such Wakf property on the strength of the order passed by commissioner of Wakf Board on 16th August, 1989 vide order No. 6179 dated 16.08.1989 reference E.C. No. 5478. The further case of the applicants is that the petitioner in collusion with the opposite party had created some forged and fabricated documents in order to grab the suit property and that is why the presence of the applicant in that misc. case is necessary for proper adjudication of the claim between the parties.
-
The specific case of the applicants, as unfolded in the petition under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code is that the present petitioner along with the opposite party is trying to grab the Wakf properties and that is why the misc. case has been filed in connivance with the opposite party to grab the property of the Wakf. It is apparent from the order passed by learned trial Judge that learned trial Judge has gone through the order and thereafter satisfied that the suit property has been registered under the registration of Wakf under chapter 5 and under relevant provisions of Wakf Act, 1995. On the...
To continue reading
Request your trial