SHYAMBABU CHOWDHURY Vs. GANESH JUTE MILLS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is at the instance of a third party and is directed against the Order dated May 25, 2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Howrah in Misc. Case No.4 of 2012 arising out of Title Executing Case No.5 of 2011.

(2.) THE decree-holder/opposite party herein got a decree for eviction of the defendants from the premises in suit from the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta and at the instance of the decree- holder, the Execution Case No.383 of 2011 was transmitted from the Hon'ble High Court to the District Judge, Howrah and the said execution case was renumbered as Title Execution Case No.5 of 2011 for execution.

(3.) UPON hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on going through the materials-on-record, I find that while making analysis of the materials-on-record, the learned Executing Court has observed that the Order No.s 5 & 6 dated February 22, 2012 were apparently routine orders in the handwriting of the Dealing Assistant of the Court and those orders could not be said to have been passed by the application of judicial mind of the P.O. This observation is contrary to the norms, decorum and respect to the predecessor of the Judge. So, this portion of the order cannot be supported and these orders relating to remarks are totally set aside. When a third party files an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC raising his independent right, due consideration of such a prayer should be done.