C.O.4105 of 2018
CAN 9929 of 2019
Suman Sankar Bhunia
Smt. Debarati Bhunia Chakraborty
Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya
Ms. Amita Shaw
…for the petitioner/husband
Mr. Arunabha Sengupta
Mr. Anjan Biswas
…for the applicant/opposite party
Re. CAN 9929 of 2019
This is an application for recalling the order dated 9th
September, 2019 by restoring CAN 2684 of 2019.
Learned advocate for the applicant/opposite party who
is newly engaged by the applicant submits that he is ready
for hearing of CAN 2684 of 2019. The applicant/opposite
party may be given an opportunity to place her case in
support of the above mentioned application. Without going
into the averment made in the instant application I am
inclined to allow the same in order to give an opportunity to
the petitioner to submit her case in respect of CAN 2684 of
2019 specially when the learned advocate for the opposite
party is also agreeable to get CAN 2684 of 2019 disposed of
Accordingly, CAN 9929 of 2019 is allowed.
CAN 2684 of 2019 is an application for recalling of the
order dated 21st February, 2019 passed by this Court in C.O.
4105 of 2018.
Suffice it to mention that since C.O.4105 of 2018 was
filed by the husband of the applicant praying for transfer of
two applications under Sections 17 and Section12 of the Guardians
and SectionWards Act, 1890 from the Court of the learned District
Judge, Darjeeling to the Court of learned District Judge,
North 24 Parganas at Barasat. It was contended by the
petitioner that the applicant /opposite party/wife/mother of
their children used to work as research associate under the
Council of Scientific and Indian Research (CSIR) on contract.
Both of them used to reside within the jurisdiction of the
learned District Judge, North 24 Parganas with their minor
child. On 9th September, 2018, the opposite party left her
matrimonial home leaving behind a SMS. At that time she
was pregnant and subsequently she gave birth to a second
child at her paternal home at Siliguri sometimes in January,
2019. On 21st February, 2019 the opposite party failed to
take step in the hearing of the said revisional application.
This Court duly considered the provision of Section 9 (1) of
the Guardians and SectionWards Act and on due consideration of the
fact that the opposite party was enjoying maternity leave for
birth of her second child and it was expected that she would
join her job at CSIR and stay along with her children within
the jurisdiction of North 24 Parganas, the Court passed the
order allowing the application filed by the petitioner
transferring both the proceedings under Sections 17 and Section12
of the Guardians and SectionWards Act from the Court of the
learned District Judge, Darjeeling to the Court of the learned
District Judge, North 24 Parganas at Barasat.
That on 7th March, 2019 the opposite party filed an
application for recalling of the aforesaid order dated 21st
February, 2019. The said application was registered as CAN
2684 of 2019. It is stated in the said application that on 21st
February, 2019 when C.O. 4105 of 2018 was fixed for
hearing before this Court, learned advocates for the opposite
party could not take any step as they missed the cause list
published on 21st February, 2019.
In course of argument it is submitted by Mr. Arunabha
Sengupta, learned advocate for the opposite party that she
has already resigned her job as research associate at CSIR,
Kolkata and she has joined in an institution at Jodhpur,
Rajasthan. She has been residing with her children at
Jodhpur. He frankly submits that in view of the changing
circumstances, no fruitful purpose will be served if the order
dated 21st February, 2019 is recalled and final order is
passed refusing the prayer for transfer of the above
mentioned two proceedings under Guardians and SectionWards Act
to North 24 Parganas and the proceedings are allowed to be
continued in Darjeeling. It is also submitted by him that the
applicant has been advised to file an application before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 25 of the Code of Civil
Procedure for transfer of the said two proceedings from West
Bengal to Rajasthan.
In view of such submission, this Court is of the
considered view that no fruitful purpose will be served if the
order dated 21st February, 2019 is recalled inasmuch as the
opposite party has been residing at Jodhpur with her two
Considering all such circumstances stated above, I do
not find any merit in CAN 2684 of 2019.
The application is thus considered and rejected.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)