Supreme Court of India
PRAMILA DEVI PRASAD VS. THE PRESIDENT, SANGHA, NABANKUR SILIGURI on 27 October 2026
ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.5 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 33855/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-09- 2026 in C.O. No. 103/2026 passed by the High Court of Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri]
PRAMILA DEVI PRASAD & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE PRESIDENT, SANGHA, NABANKUR SILIGURI Respondent(s)
IA No. 310346/2026 - VACATING STAY
Date : 27-10-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. T. V. George- 1441, AOR
Mr. Pankaj Bist, Adv.
Mr. Vijay Rawat, Adv.
Mr. Sanatan Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Karan Chauhan, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Nihant Panicker, Adv.
Mr. Sorokhaibam Shanti Jyoti Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ankolekar Gurudatta- 1677, AOR
Upon hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
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.
O R D E R
The above petition was filed against the order of the High Court, which sustained the order of the Trial Court dated 15.07.2026, in the suit filed by the petitioner herein, modifying the status quo order dated
Digitally signed by HARPREET KAUR Date: 2026.10.28 16:15:43 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
31.07.2025, which was confirmed after contest on 04.09.2025 and permitting the respondent-Club to celebrate the ensuing Durga Puja on the suit property by erecting Puja Pandal, with direction to remove the same immediately after completion of puja. The modification by the High Court in the revision filed was only with respect to a direction to the Civil Court to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to ensure that the temporary structures constructed therein are dismantled.
2. We granted a stay of the impugned orders and today we are told that the matter has become infructuous since Durga Puja is over, however, the suit is still pending and the petitioner prays that it may be expedited.
3. The suit was filed for declaring the absolute ownership of the plaintiff over the plaint scheduled property and declaring that the defendant has absolutely no right, title or interest over the said property. The suit produced in the Special Leave Petition as Annexure P5 also sought for a perpetual injunction against organizing Durga Puja in the plaintiff’s premises and an order for removal of temporary structures erected, as also perpetual injunction restraining the defendant-Club from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs.
4. We are told by the respondent-Club that the Durga Puja was conducted on the basis of an agreement, which we find at Annexure R1. We find absolutely no consideration and the agreement also is unstamped. Further, the terms indicate that the plaintiff is obliged to keep vacant forever a portion of the property for performing annual Durga Puja, which we find prima facie to be unconscionable.
5. In any event, the suit is pending and we are of the opinion that it should be expedited. The Trial Court shall keep in mind our observations regarding the agreement when disposing of the suit.
6. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand rejected. (HARPREET KAUR) (POOJA SHARMA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)