D/L- 7 14/07/2026 Ct. No.- 6 Aritra C.O. 2144 of 2026 Abdul Hafiz & Ors. Vs. Ekbar Ali Karikar & Ors. Mr. Haradhan Mondal ….for the petitioners This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against an order being no.22 dated May 18, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), 2nd Court at Ranaghat, District-Nadia in Title Suit No.85 of 2025. By the order impugned the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure stood rejected. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the opposite parties are not in any way related to R.S. Plot No.2735 under Khatian No.1286 within Mouza-Sutragarh. It is the contention of the petitioners in the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure that after vesting under the Estate Acquisition Act, the intermediaries left India and did not retain any land in accordance with law. It is the further contention of the petitioners that the plaintiffs/opposite parties claiming their rights from the alleged attorneys of the intermediaries and not from the raiyat of the said land and, therefore, the plaint of the instant suit should be rejected. 2 After going through the statements made in the plaint this Court finds that it has been specifically pleaded that the plaintiffs i.e. the opposite parties herein are claiming right, title and interest in the suit property on the basis of the Record of Rights. The opposite parties have alleged interference of their possession in respect of the suit property by the petitioners herein. Thus the plaint, in the considered view of this Court discloses a cause of action. Whether the intermediaries lost their right after vesting and also whether the newly created plots have any nexus with the original plot no.2735 are all disputed questions of fact which requires a trial on evidence. The learned trial judge was right in holding that the plaint discloses a cause of action. The application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure was rejected by the learned trial judge by a reasoned order. This Court is not inclined to interfere with such order. Accordingly, CO 2144 of 2026 stands disposed of. At this stage, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the hearing of the suit be expedited. The learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), 2nd Court at Ranaghat, District-Nadia is requested to make an endeavour to dispose of Title Suit No.85 of 2025 as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided the suit is otherwise ready for hearing. There will be no order as to costs. 3 All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)