Subrata Talukdar, J. - (1.) The present application under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 10th July, 2014 passed by the learned 9th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 381 of 1996. By the order impugned No. 123 dated 10th July, 2014 the learned trial Court observed that by previous Order No. 122 dated 27th June, 2014 it was, inter alia, directed that preliminary issues regarding maintainability of the suit may be framed on the next date. The learned trial Court also dismissed the prayer of the plaintiff on the point that while the suit was filed in 1996, the written statement was filed as late as on 23rd December, 2013 compelling the learned Lawyer for the plaintiff to raise objection with regard to the acceptance of the written statement.
(2.) On the contrary learned Lawyer for the defendant drew the attention of the learned trial Court to a petition dated 16th September, 2013 by which the learned Court was pleased to direct the plaintiff to provide a copy of the plaint to the defendant. After receipt of the copy of the plaint the written statement was submitted. Therefore, the learned trial Court agreed with the submission of the defendant that no delay was committed in filing the written statement. Accordingly, written statement was accepted and the preliminary issues were framed.
(3.) The petitioner before this Court is the plaintiff. The suit was filed for declaration and permanent injunction. The plaintiff claimed declaration that he is a moiety shareholder in respect of the suit premises which the plaintiff claims to be in joint ownership with the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, who are his blood brothers.;