IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
CO No. 1871 of 2017
CO No. 1872 of 2017
Smita Mishra Biswas
Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta
… for the petitioner
Mr. Srijib Chakraborty
Mr. Sk. Aizul … for the opposite party
Vakalatnama being Nos.
A 11624 and A 11625
Since the prayer of the petitioner in these two applications is for transfer of both the
proceedings being Act VIII Case No. 114 of 2016, F. No. 8804 of 2016 and Act VIII Case No. 140
of 2016, F. No. 10438 of 2016 pending between the same parties, both these applications are
disposed of by this common order.
In the first application it is the case of the petitioner that he first filed Act VIII Case No. 114
of 2016 against the opposite party in these applications, before the learned District Judge at
Alipore, South 24 Parganas for his appointment as the guardian of the minor son and by an order
dated August 10, 2016 passed in a writ petition a learned Single Judge of this Court requested the
learned District Judge to dispose of the said application with utmost expedition, but the said
application is yet to be decided by the learned District Judge. In the second application the
petitioner has alleged that the learned District Judge is unnecessarily proceeding with the
application, being Act VIII Case No. 140 of 2016 filed by the opposite party wife under Section 25
of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 claiming for permanent custody and return of the minor
child. According to the petitioner, in view of the inordinate delay in disposal of his application
being Act VIII Case No. 114 of 2016, this Court should allow his prayer for transfer of both the
proceedings pending before the learned District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas to any other
After considering the materials on record and the argument advanced on behalf of the
learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, I dispose of both the applications by requesting
the learned District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas to dispose of both the proceedings being
Act VIII Case No. 114 of 2016 and Act VIII Case No. 140 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible
preferably, within the month of December, 2017 by way of analogous hearing and without granting
any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
The learned District Judge, South 24 Parganas is requested to prepone the next date of
It is also recorded that both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the opposite
party in these applications assured this Court that none of the parties shall seek adjournment of
hearing of the above applications before the learned District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas
and they shall render all assistance to the learned District Judge to comply with the request of this
Since the opposite party was not required to file any affidavit in opposition in any of these
applications, the allegations made as against him are deemed not to have been admitted.
With the above directions, CO 1871 of 2017 and CO 1872 of 2017 stand disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Certified website copies of the order, if applied for, be urgently made available to the
parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)