- (1.) THE petitioner is the plaintiff (hereafter the plaintiff) in Title Suit No. 2772 of 2007, pending on the file of the learned Judge, Bench VII, City Civil Court at Calcutta, wherein the opposite parties are the defendants (hereafter the defendants). It is a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction, permanent injunction as well as for damages. After the suit was filed, the plaintiff filed two applications, one under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereafter the Code) read with Section 151 thereof, inter alia, seeking to restrain the defendants and their men and agents from bringing any vehicle within the compound of the suit premises or from parking any vehicle therein. THE petitioner had also filed an application under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Code read with Section 151 thereof praying for appointment of a Receiver.
(2.) BY order no.15 dated 24th June, 2008, the learned Judge passed, on contest, an order of injunction on contest. The defendants were restrained from bringing any vehicle within the suit premises or from parking any vehicle therein till the disposal of the suit. However, the application for appointment of Receiver stood rejected. It is not in dispute that none of the parties to the suit questioned the propriety and/or legality of the order dated 24th June, 2008 and hence the same attained finality. Alleging that the order dated 24th June, 2008 was being persistently violated by the defendants, the plaintiff moved an application under Section 151 before the trial Court seeking an order of police help. On a contested hearing, the learned Judge by order dated 23rd September, 2008 allowed the application. The Officer-in-Charge, Hare Street Police Station, Kolkata, was directed to render sufficient police protection to implement the order of injunction dated 24th June, 2008. A further application under Section 151 of the Code was preferred by the plaintiff on 6th May, 2010 alleging, inter alia, that no help had been extended by the police authorities and as a result of police inaction, the defendants were flouting the Court's order with impunity.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY, it was prayed that an order be passed directing the Officer-in-Charge, Hare Street Police Station, and the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Central), Kolkata Police to personally appear before the Court and explain why appropriate action should not be taken against them for not rendering police help to the plaintiff in spite of specific direction. The application was opposed by the defendants by filing written objection. Dismissal of the application was prayed for on the ground that the police officers are not parties to the suit and hence no order could be passed against them.;