High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Rana Chaterjee vs Shrimati Shushila Yadav on 21 October, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Rana Chaterjee vs Shrimati Shushila Yadav on 21 October, 2011
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                         C.R. No.2268 of 2007
                   Rana Chaterjee son of Shri Gopal Chandra Chatterjee,
                   resident of Mohalla Kaahzi Hotel, Konak (South of
                   Darbar Cinema) P.O. Siwan, PS Siwan Town,District
                   Siwan             ......Petitioner/Defendant
                                               Versus
                   Shrimati Shushila Yadav, wife of Dr. Ramjee Choudhary,
                   residents of Village Gaushala Road, PO Siwan, PS
                   Siwan,District Siwan.......Opposite party/ Plaintiff
                                                  -----------

08- 21/11/2011 Heard Mr. R K Shukla for the petitioner, and Mr.

Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi for the opposite party. The

defendant is the petitioner in an application under Section

115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is aggrieved by the

order dated 21.8.2007, passed by the learned Sub Judge III,

Siwan, whereby the application filed by the defendant to

consider the preliminary objection raised by him at the

preliminary stage has been rejected, and it has been ordered

that the same shall be considered at the time of disposal of

the suit.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant (the

petitioner) submits that in order to avoid wastage of public

time and money the court should always strive to dispose of

matters at the preliminary stage. He relies on my judgment

in the case of Dilip Gupta v. Debashish Palit [2005 (3)

PLJR 623] (para- 27).

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff (the opposite
2

party) submits that the hearing of the suit has already

concluded in March 2010 which renders the present civil

revision application infructuous.

4. We have perused the materials on record and

considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties. In view of the statements of Mr. Shashi Shekhar

Dwivedi, learned counsel for the plaintiff, that the hearing

of the suit has concluded in March 2010, and now oral

arguments have to commence, this civil revision application

has become infructuous. It is accordingly dismissed.

mrl                             ( S K Katriar, J.)