Present: Asmita Samajder [J.O.

Code – WB00956],
Civil Judge (Senior Division),
9th Court, Alipore,
South 24 – Parganas
Title Suit 89 of 1997
[CNR:- WBSP02-000149-2017]

Order dated 10.08.23

Plaintiffs files hazira.

The defendants nos. 27,49 to 53, 25 and 40, 55, 56 and 57 to 86 file their respective
haziras.
Today is fixed for further cross examination of DW1 namely, Sadhan Kumar Pramanik.
DW1 namely, Sadhan Kumar Pramanik is present today in the court. The Ld. Advocates
for the contesting parties to this suit are present in court today.
The matter is thus taken up for cross-examination of DW1.
DW1 namely, Sadhan Kumar Pramanik is further cross-examined by the Ld.
Advocate for the plaintiffs today. At this stage, at 12.40 pm, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs
refuses to further cross-examine the DW1 on the ground of lack of production of documents
by him. Despite repeated requests by this court to the Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs, he
refuses to further cross-examine the said witness and instead, creates huge commotion inside
the courtroom in front of this court, the witness and the other Ld. Advocates on record.
Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs thereafter prays for passing necessary order and he
further agitates before this court that the Order passed by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court
in C.O. No. 2576 of 2023 was passed against the plaintiffs in an ex-parte manner, without
giving him an opportunity of being heard. He further shouts in open court during the
proceeding of this court and states- “I will be guided by no one. High Court a aamake shona
hoini. Aami Supreme Court jabo. Ei sakkhi facts suppress korche. Aami ar cross korbo na ei
sakkhi ke. Aapni close kore din.”
The conduct of Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs is thus hereby noted on record. It is to
be noted here that being an Officer of the Court, he should not behave in this manner inside
the courtroom, specially when the Presiding Officer of the court is sitting, and his conduct is
very unbecoming of a Lawyer. He is thus directed to maintain the decorum and sanctity of
the court henceforth.
Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs thereafter files a petition u/s 151 of CPC, copies of which
have been served, and in such petition, the plaintiffs pray for passing necessary order directing the
DW1 to produce/submit the documents mentioned during his cross-examination, thereby giving an
opportunity to the plaintiffs to verify the authenticity of each of those documents by cross-
examination. Oral objection is raised by the Ld. Advocate for the defendant nos. 57 to 86 against
the instant petition. It is thus taken up for consideration and adjudication. By filing such petition,
the plaintiffs contended that the plaintiffs had started cross-examining the DW1 on 09/08/2023 at
10.30 am and put questions, almost 500 in number, throughout the working hours of this Court.

(Contd..)
 Title Suit 89 of 1997
[CNR:- WBSP02-000149-2017]

(..contd..)/Order dated 10.08.23

Plaintiffs mentioned that the said DW1 not bring documents inspite of demand of those
documents on earlier occasions. Plaintiffs also alleged that the DW1 did not answer some vital
questions, and on dock stated that he can able to produce those documents, if required. Further,
plaintiffs contended that the DW1 has given false evidence and deposition on dock. For the said
reasons, the plaintiffs prayed for more time to cross-examine the said DW1 and also prayed for
some documents from the said DW1, which are relevant for the proper adjudication of the suit.
Perusal of the petition portrays that such petition has been filed intentionally by the
plaintiffs to further prolong the proceedings of this suit, despite specific directions and orders of
the Hon’ble Court and orders of this court as well. The DW1 has mentioned during his cross-
examination by the plaintiffs today that he cannot file any other document before this court in this
suit apart from those documents which he has already filed. Now, if the DW1 does not produce
any document before this court as required during his cross-examination, then the necessary
presumption can be highlighted by the plaintiffs at the final hearing of this suit. The
plaintiffs have simply filed the present petition today as part of their dilatory tactics, which is
evident from the ordersheets on the record itself. Moreover, the record reveals that time and
again, the plaintiffs have tried to cause hindrance in the proceedings of this suit, by filing one
petition after another, which is highly deplorable. Hence, in light of the aforesaid
discussions, I find no merit in the petition u/s 151 of CPC filed by the plaintiffs today and
accordingly, it is rejected on contest, with costs of Rs. 1000/- to be paid by the plaintiffs to the
District Legal Services Authority, Alipore, South 24-Parganas.
The plaintiffs file a time petition thereafter for payment of costs of Rs. 10000/- as per
order dated 20/07/2023 passed by this court, on the grounds stated therein. It is considered and
allowed.
It is now 1.30 pm and hence, the suit is adjourned till 2pm. Ld. Advocate for the contesting
defendant nos. 53 to 56, and 57 to 86 mention that they will cross-examine the DW1. Thus, such
cross-examination will take place at 2pm.

Dictated and corrected by me;

Sd/-

Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), 9th Court

Alipore, South 24-Parganas
[J.O. Code – WB00956]

Later/Order dated 10.08.2023 at 2 pm

It is now 2 pm and record is taken up for cross-examination of the DW1 by the defendant
nos. 53 to 56, and 57 to 86. Such cross-examination is done and is thereafter concluded. Cross-
examination of the DW1 by the defendant nos. 27, 40, and 49 to 52 is declined. In this respect, the
defendant nos. 27 and 40 file two separate petitions. They are considered and allowed.
(Contd..)
 Title Suit 89 of 1997
[CNR:- WBSP02-000149-2017]

(..contd..)/Order dated 10.08.23

Ld. Advocate for the defendant nos. 49 to 52 verbal submits that he shall not cross-examine the
DW1. Cross-examination of DW1 is thus concluded and he is thereafter discharged.
Now, it appears from the record that vide order dated 07/08/2023 passed by this court, it
was mentioned that after completion of cross-examination of DW1, the suit shall be taken up for
hearing of the party add petition dated 27/07/2023 filed by the plaintiffs and the day to day hearing
in this suit shall take place on and from 16/08/2023. This was an inadvertent mistake, since
tomorrow, i.e., 11/08/2023 is a working day of the court.
Hence, the record shall be taken up tomorrow for hearing of the party add petition
dated 27/07/2023 filed by the plaintiffs. Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs and the Ld. Advocates
on record for the contesting defendants, who are present in court now, are informed about
tomorrow’s date and purpose.
Hence, fixing 11/08/2023 for hearing of the party add petition dated 27/07/2023 filed by
the plaintiffs at 2 pm and for payment of costs of Rs. 1000/- to be paid by the plaintiffs, as
envisaged by this order.

Dictated and corrected by me;

Sd/-

Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), 9th Cour

Alipore, South 24-Parganas
[J.O. Code – WB00956]