Whether Communication By Advocate About An Order amounts Production Of Certified Copy?

Since it is well-settled that communication by an advocate is
as good as production of certified copy of the order in question,
unless strongly rebutted, prima facie the trial court acted without
jurisdiction in disbelieving such communication and disposing of
the application in question on merits.

In the High Court at Calcutta
Civil Revisional Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
C.O. No. 631 of 2018

Smt. Bindu Dadlani  Vs Smt. Gita Ghosh




The defendant in an eviction suit has filed the instant
application. The petitioner had filed her examination-in-chief in
connection with an application under Section 7(1) and (2) of the
West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 and had sought an
opportunity to lead evidence. On a particular date, when petitioner
was absent, such prayer of the petitioner, for leading evidence, was
turned down by the trial court. Challenging such order, refusing
leading of evidence, the petitioner preferred a revisional
application, giving rise to C.O. No. 4158 of 2017, which is still
pending in this Court. Vide order dated December 21, 2017, a coordinate
bench of this Court directed the revisional application to
appear on a returnable date and granted the petitioner liberty to
pray for adjournment before the court below.

Pursuant to such liberty, the petitioner prayed for
adjournment in the court below upon production of an advocate’s
letter communicating the said order of this Court. Despite such
communication, the trial court took up for hearing the application
under Section 7(1) and (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy
Act and disposed of the same by the impugned order dated
January 29, 2018.
Since it is well-settled that communication by an advocate is
as good as production of certified copy of the order in question,
unless strongly rebutted, prima facie the trial court acted without
jurisdiction in disbelieving such communication and disposing of
the application in question on merits.
Accordingly, petitioner will serve a copy of C.O. No. 631 of
2018 on the opposite party and/or on the learned advocate
appearing for the opposite party in the court below indicating that
the matter will appear in the monthly combined list of August,
2018 as a “listed motion” when the petitioner will file an affidavit of
service.
There will an order of stay of all further proceedings in
Ejectment Suit No. 28 of 2014 pending in the Third Additional
Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Alipore, District South 24-
Parganas till August 31, 2018 or until further orders, whichever is
earlier.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

Print Page