Calcutta High Court
CO/1953/2026 of CHITTA RANJAN GHOSH Vs NITYA GOPAL GHOSH on 7 October 2026
Item No.11 sudipta IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE CO 1953 of 2026 Chitta Ranjan Ghosh Vs. Nitya Gopal Ghosh (Via Video Conference) Mr. Satyam Mukherjee Mr. Kingshuk Dasgupta Ms. Debomita Biswas Ms. Tamanna Sheikh …for the petitioner Ms. Bipasa
07.10.2026
Court No.2
Item No.11
sudipta
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
CO 1953 of 2026
Chitta Ranjan Ghosh
Vs.
Nitya Gopal Ghosh
(Via Video Conference)
Mr. Satyam Mukherjee
Mr. Kingshuk Dasgupta
Ms. Debomita Biswas
Ms. Tamanna Sheikh
…for the petitioner
Ms. Bipasa Bhattacharjee
Mr. Koushik Roy
…for the opposite party
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 2nd June, 2026 in Title Appeal no. 26 of 2025 whereby the learned Appellate Court has passed an order of ad interim injunction in the nature of maintaining status quo. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this order is illegal as there was no injunction during the suit.
2. However, during the course of submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter may be remanded back to the learned Appellate Court with a direction to dispose of the Title Appeal no. 26 of 2025 expeditiously within a limited time frame
2 after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard in accordance with law.
3. In view of the submissions made, the matter is remanded back to the learned Appellate Court to decide the Title Appeal no. 26 of 2025 expeditiously preferably within 12 weeks, without granting any unnecessary adjournment, in accordance with law after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard.
4. With the above observations, the present petition stands disposed of.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and no expressions made herein shall tantamount to be an expression on the merits of the case.
6. All parties hall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.)