Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37027 (CAL)

BIPASHA DASGUPTA (CHOUDHURY) v. PRASENJIT DASGUPTA

CRR/3288/2024 · 2025-02-20

Joymalya Bagchi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

20.02.2025. 01. Ct.No.28. as C.R.R. 3288 of 2024 with CRAN 1 of 2024 In Re:- An application for recalling. In the matter of : Smt. Bipasha Dasgupta (Choudhury). …. Petitioner. Mr. Debasis Kar. …for the Petitioner. 1. Petitioner has prayed for recalling of order dated 24.09.2024 whereby this Court dismissed her prayer for transfer of proceeding from the file of Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barasat. In the recalling application petitioner has indicated she had made application before the trial Magistrate with regard to adverse comments made against her but no steps had been taken. 2. I have gone through the application which was filed before the Magistrate. In the said application it is contended inspite of directions given by this Court to dispose of the prayer for interim maintenance within a specified time frame, Magistrate failed to do so and observed that the litigant may approach High Court for necessary order. 3. One must bear in mind the heavy pendency in the file of each Magistrate, Judicial Officers are over worked and the 2 Hon’ble Apex Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.1 held appeal from exceptional circumstances time frame for disposal of proceeding is not warranted. 4. The other issue canvassed in the petition is an incorrect recording of date in the petitioner’s deposition. The said issue may be agitated in course of final hearing of the case. 5. However, the averments in the application in my opinion do not make out any case of bias against the petitioner which would call for transfer of proceeding. 6. I am informed interim maintenance has already been awarded and the same has been assailed by the petitioner before the Revisional Court. 7. In such view of the matter, I do not find any reason to recall my order dismissing the petition. 8. Accordingly, the application being No.1 of 2024 is dismissed. 9. Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned Advocate for the petitioner on usual undertaking. (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 1 2024 (6) SCC 267 3