SANDIP KUMAR SINHA Vs. NIRMAL DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer for extension of interim order has been made. An application for vacating the interim order has been filed by Mr. Ajit Panja on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 5. Mr. Tapan Dutta on behalf of the respondent No.7 has filed an affidavit-in-opposition. Now the matter is hotly contested.

(2.) Mr. Sen opposed the taking up of the application for vacating the interim order on the ground that it is not appearing in the list and that the matter is appearing for extension of interim order and not for vacating the interim order. Be that as it may, the question now before us is as to whether the interim order should continue or not. The grant of interim order is dependant on the prima facie case being made out. When the interim order was granted, on the facts of the case disclosed by the petitioner, we found that prima facie case was made out and as such we had granted the interim order. The suit is one for partition. Normally interim orders are granted in such suit for partition in respect of allotment until the final decree is passed.

(3.) At this stage, some materials have been brought out by means of an application for vacating the interim order. These are on record. We may not take up the application for vacating the interim order as contended by Mr. Sen. But the fact remains that Mr. Panja and Mr. Dutta, counsel appearing for the respective respondents, have opposed the extension of interim order. Mr. Panja in course of his submission relied on some materials, which were on record before the Court below since made part of the application for vacating the interim order. Mr. Dutta in course of his submission relied upon the affidavit-in-opposition. There cannot be any embargo preventing the Court from looking into the materials placed before it for the purpose of considering whether the interim order should be allowed to continue or not.