MAMATA RAY Vs. RANJAN KUMAR CHAKRAVARTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common issues are involved in these two revisional applications, the same are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Leave is granted to the learned advocate-on-record for the petitioner to correct the cause title of these two revisional applications. The substituted plaintiff in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Second Court at Barasat, North 24 Parganas, has filed this application being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with an order dated July 17, 2019, passed in Title Suit No. 27 of 2010 being heard analogously with Title Suit 45 of 2011.

(3.) By the impugned order the learned court below rejected the petitions of interrogatories filed in both the suits by the petitioner as plaintiff as also the defendant respectively. The learned Judge came to a finding that upon perusal of the interrogatories, it revealed that the questions of interrogatories were subject matters of both the suits and those interrogatories were required to be adjudicated upon taking evidence during trial. The learned court further found that by the said interrogatories attempts were made to extract evidence. The interrogatories, according to the learned court were in the form of questionnaires and questions of facts. The court was of the view that the said questions should be decided on evidence at the stage of trial.