D/L- 16 06/08/2026 Ct. No.- 6 Aritra C.O. 2445 of 2026 Sri Balaram Roy Vs. Sri Nupur Kumar Bose & Ors. Mr. Debraj De ….for the petitioner Mr. Anirban Pal ….for the opposite party no.1 This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the appellant in Title Appeal No.70 of 2024 challenging the order dated June 18, 2026 passed by learned Judge, 4th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta. By the order impugned the prayer of the petitioner to amend the memorandum appeal stood rejected. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that through inadvertence certain grounds were not incorporated in the memorandum of appeal and the petitioner seeks to add certain documents in the list of documents in the memorandum of appeal. The learned advocate appearing for the opposite party no.1 submits that additional documents cannot be incorporated in the memorandum of appeal by way of amendment. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the materials placed. From the application for amendment of the memorandum of appeal this Court finds that the petitioner sought to add certain documents in the memorandum of 2 appeal with an object of relying on the same at the time of hearing of the appeal. On a query of the Court, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, in his usual fairness submits that the documents which the petitioner sought to add in the list of documents in the memorandum of appeal were not marked as exhibits before the trial court. The documents which are not part of the records of the trial court cannot be allowed to be relied upon mechanically. It will be open to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law insofar as the documents which has been referred to in the schedule of amendment. Insofar as the prayer of the petitioner to add certain grounds in the memorandum of appeal this Court finds that Order XLI Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code specifically provides that the appellant shall not, except by leave of the Court, urge or be heard in support of any ground of objection not set forth in the memorandum of appeal; but the Appellate Court, in deciding the appeal shall not be confined to the grounds of objections set forth in the memorandum of appeal or taken by leave of the Court under this rule. Thus, it is well-open to the petitioner to raise additional grounds of objection though not set forth in the memorandum of appeal except by way of leave. If the petitioner seeks leave of the Court to urge certain grounds, it will be open to the learned Judge of the Appellate Court to consider the same at the appropriate stage. 3 With the above observations, CO 2445 of 2026 stands disposed of by requesting the learned Judge, 4th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta to make an endeavour to dispose of the Title appeal No.70 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. There will be no order as to costs. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)