JPD-30 Ct No.07 08.06.2026 TN Calcutta High Court In The Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side FMA 65 of 2025 IA No: CAN 3 of 2025 Subhabrata Paul Choudhury Vs. Imran Hossain Biswas Mr. Bapi Sarkar, Mr. Roumyadip Saha …. for the appellant Mr. Prajwal Gurung ….for the respondent Re: CAN 3 of 2025 1. The background of the case is peculiar. 2. The appeal arises out of an order passed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure in connection with a suit for specific performance filed by the appellant. 3. By an order dated June 19, 2025, a coordinate Bench of this Court had recorded that the appeal stood disposed of in terms of the “terms of settlement” entered into between the parties, as reflected in the schedule to CAN 2 of 2025, and a decree be passed in terms thereof in the suit itself. 4. However, the respondent/petitioner in the present application bearing CAN 3 of 2025 submits that despite several communications via WhatsApp by the learned Advocate for the respondent/petitioner 2 to his counterpart appearing originally of behalf of the appellant, seeking particulars and details of the bank account of the appellant in order to transfer the money required to be paid by the respondent to the appellant, there was no response on the part of the appellant, which led to the inability of the present petitioner to adhere to the 20 working days’ period for making the balance payment in terms of the settlement. 5. As such, the respondent/petitioner seeks the recall of the order recording compromise, as allegedly, due to the non-responsiveness of the appellant, the said compromise could not reach fruition. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/opposite party rebuts the contentiond of the respondent/petitioner and submits that since there were previous transactions between the parties and the bank account particulars of the appellant were well-known to the respondent all along, the flimsy excuse of non-furnishing the bank account particulars is being used merely as a pretext for the respondent not to comply with the terms of settlement. 7. It is further pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent’s Advocate wrote to the erstwhile learned Advocate appearing for the appellant without directly communicating with the 3 appellant. Thus, it cannot be said that the conduct of the respondent/petitioner is bona fide. 8. Be that as it may, upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the parties are now ad idem regarding the appeal being required to be heard on merits upon recall of the order recording the terms of settlement, since the settlement has not reached fruitful culmination. 9. We hereby record that it is also admitted by both sides that at present, a total amount of Rs.32 lakh, paid at different times by the respondent to the appellant, is lying with the appellant. Moreover, an amount of Rs.50 lakh in total remains deposited with the Court by way of demand drafts furnished by the respondent at different points of time. 10. In view of the above development, we deem it fit to recall the order recording compromise and direct the appeal to be heard on merits. 11. Needless to say, the amounts indicated above shall be subject to the final outcome of the appeal. 12. Accordingly, CAN 3 of 2025 is allowed, thereby recalling the order dated June 19, 2025 and restoring the appeal bearing FMAT 7 of 2025 (now FMA 65 of 2025) as well as CAN 1 of 2025 for hearing. 13. There will be no order as to costs. 4 Re: FMA 65 of 2025 14. On the prayer of the respondent, the respondent is directed to file affidavit-in-opposition to CAN 1 of 2025 within a fortnight from date; reply thereto, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter. 15. In view of the limited nature of the appeal, the appeal shall be heard on the papers annexed to the memorandum of appeal as well as CAN 1 of 2025 by dispensing with the requirement of preparing paper books as well as calling for the records. 16. In view of appearance of both the parties, the appeal be treated to be ready as regards service and also otherwise ready for hearing. 17. The appeal be listed along with the application under the heading “Applications” before the appropriate Bench in the next Circuit. 18. It is made clear that the appeal shall be taken up for hearing along with the application on the returnable date. (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) (Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)