Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Calcutta High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. July

Sri Vimal J. Bavishi and Anr vs. Gaurav vs. . Sanghvi and Ors

Decided on 31 July 2024• Citation: CO/2673/2024• Calcutta High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                    31.07.2024                                                      
                    (D/L-19)                                                        
                    Ct.-19                                                          
                    (Susanta)                                                       
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA             
                                           CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION            
                                                 C.O. 2673 of 2024                  
                                              Sri Vimal J. Bavishi & Anr.           
                                                      -Vs-                          
                                             Sri Gaurav V. Sanghvi & Ors.           
                                   Mr. Debajyoti Mondal,                            
                                                                        .           
                                                       … For the Petitioners        
                                   Ms. Shohini Chakraborty,                         
                                   Mr. Prajaaini Das,                               
                                                       …. For the O.P. No. 1.       
                                   The plaintiffs in a suit for declaration and     
                               recovery of possession are the petitioners of the    
                               instant application under Article 227 of the         
                               Constitution of India which is directed against the  
                               order dated May 13, 2024 passed by the 3rd           
                               Additional Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior      
                               Division), Alipore, District-24-Parganas (South) in  
                               the said suit being Title Suit No. 1 of 2016.        
                                    The  learned Trial Judge by the order           
                               impugned,  has  allowed an  application for          
                               amendment of the written statement filed by the      
                               defendant no. 1, the opposite party no. 1 herein.    
                                   Mr. Debajyoti Mondal, the learned advocate       
                               for the petitioners submits that the trial of the suit
                               has commenced  long back in the year 2017,           
                               therefore, the amendment should not have been        
                               allowed.                                             
                                   Ms. Shohini Chakraborty, learned advocate        
                               for the opposite party no. 1, submits that the facts 

                                                   2                                
                               sought to be incorporated in the written statement   
                               by way of amendment are the events happened          
                               subsequent to the commencement of trial.             
                                   It appears from the said application for         
                               amendment  that the defendant no. 1, by the          
                               proposed amendment  has sought to bring on           
                               record the fact of execution of some deeds,          
                               executed subsequent to the commencement of           
                               trial, therefore, the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of 
                               the Code of Civil Procedure is not a bar in allowing 
                               the said application for amendment.                  
                                   The order impugned, for the aforesaid reason,    
                               does not call for any interference.                  
                                    C.O. 2673 of 2024 is therefore dismissed        
                               without any order as to costs.                       
                                   The suit since is pending since 2011, the        
                               learned Trial Judge is requested to expedite the     
                               disposal of it and in doing so, shall not grant any  
                               unnecessary adjournment to the parties.              
                                   Parties to act on the server copy of this order  
                               duly downloaded from the official website of this    
                               Court.                                               
                                   Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
                               applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to   
                               compliance with all requisite formalities.           
                                                         (Biswajit Basu, J.)