C o u r t N . 2 2 S l 1 5 1 / C L 29.07.26 D/L Sl-08 Ct. 06 (Samar) CO. 2408 of 2026 Haigreve Khaitan Vs. Arvind Parasramka & Ors. Mr. S.N. Mookherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Shounak Mitra, Mr. V.V.V. Sastry, Mr. Sameer Saha, Mr. Milind Jain, Ms. Khushi, Gupta, … for the petitioner. Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Mr. Debrup Bhattacharjee, Mr. Steven S. Biswas, Mr. Siddharth Singh, ….for the opposite party No. 1. Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, ….for the opposite party nos. 6 & 7. 1. This revisional application is directed against an order dated July 13, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court at Alipore, South 24- Parganas in Title Suit No. 1312 of 2025 whereby the petitioner’s right to file written statement in the suit and written objection to the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed by the plaintiff/opposite party no. 1 (hereafter “the opposite party”), has been closed. 2. After the matter has been argued for sometime by Mr. Mookherjee, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Gupta, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party submits, on 2 instructions, that the plaintiff/opposite party has no objection to the restoration of the petitioner’s right to file written statement in the suit and written objection to the opposite party’s application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code. 3. Since the plaintiff/opposite party has consented to the restoration of the petitioner’s right to file written statement and written objection as aforesaid, therefore, the order dated July 13, 2026 is set aside to the extent the same forfeits the petitioner’s rights to file written statement in the suit and to file written objection to the plaintiff’s application for injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code. 4. Since both the parties are here and have agreed and consented to the above order being passed, therefore, in order to expedite the proceeding, let written statement as well as written objection as aforesaid be filed within a period of four weeks from date. Copies thereof shall be served upon the learned advocate appearing for the plaintiff/opposite party. 5. It is submitted by Mr. Mookherjee that the suit itself is not maintainable in view the settlement agreement dated December 04, 2025. Such argument is refuted by Mr. Gupta. He submits that 3 the said agreement has been observed in breach by the petitioner. 6. However, since this Court has passed this order on consent, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of such submission. All points including the abovenoted point will be open to be urged before and to be decided by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law. 7. With the above observations, CO. 2408 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (Om Narayan Rai, J.)