SARAJIT CHATTOPADHYAY ALIAS CHATTERJEE Vs. DILIP MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is to the order no.12 dated April 24, 2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kalyani in Misc. Case No.47 of 2007 arising out of the Misc. Case No.82 of 1994.

(2.) THE opposite parties of the original Misc. Case No.82 of 1994 have preferred this revisional application. THE short fact is that the predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties, namely, Kalipada Mandal instituted the Misc. Case No.82 of 1994 under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 for preemption in respect of 29 decimals of land, as described in the schedule3 of the plaint. That misc. case is being contested by the present petitioners. It appears that they adopted various measures so that the misc. case could not be proceeded with. First of all, the misc. case was fixed for matters relating to deposit of the consideration money along with 10% of the same. THE petitioners were not satisfied with the orders relating to deposit of the consideration money. THE petitioners preferred a misc. revisional application being C.R. No.50 of 1997 before the learned Additional District Judge No.II. That was disposed of by the concerned learned Additional District Judge No.II. But being not satisfied, the opposite parties preferred a civil revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Hon"ble Court and Hon"ble Justice Amitava Lala disposed of the said revisional application thereby confirming the order passed by the learned Trial Judge. THE original petitioner, that is, the preemptor died on December 24, 1997 and the heirs of late Kalipada Mandal preferred the said revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Hon"ble High Court. In the meantime, several steps were taken by the parties. THE petitioners preferred a civil revisional application being C.R. No.5 of 2003 before the learned District Judge, Nadia incorporating the names of the heirs of late Kalipada Mandal.

(3.) THUS, from the above situation, it is clear that substitution of the legal heirs of deceased Kalipada Mandal was duly recorded in the revisional proceedings pending before the higher forum.