21.08.2026 Item No.23 Ct. No. 652 RP CO 4144 OF 2025 BANKU SEK @ SEK BANKU & ORS. VS PRIYANATH ROY BIDYA NIKETAN & ORS. Mr. Sukanta Das …… For Petitioners 1. The petitioners’ prayer in the instant revision is for a direction upon the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Paschim Medinipur for expeditious disposal of J. Misc. Case No.67 of 2024, arising out of Misc. Appeal No.16 of 2024 abated on 15.8.2024. 2. The petitioners obtained ex parte decree in TS No.02 of 2002 from the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court at Midnapore on 26.03.2010. Till date, the petitioners have not been able to execute the said decree and their execution case is pending. 3. That is due to the fact that since the suit was decreed on 26.03.2010, the opposite parties have been filing various applications, one after another, though not appropriately following up those in the Court, with due diligence, resulting into dismissal of each of 2 the applications filed by them, after the ex parte decree was passed by the Court. 4. Lastly, the Misc. Appeal No.16 of 2024 was filed by the opposite parties/judgment- debtors, which was abated on 15.08.2024 and in connection with the said appeal the opposite parties/judgment-debtors filed J. Misc. Case No.67 of 2024, seeking to set aside abetment of the appeal. 5. In view of the facts of the case as stated above and the petitioners’ prayer made in this revision, the Court considers it unnecessary to issue direction for service upon the opposite parties and finds this revision may be disposed of here and now. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances as above, let this revision be disposed of with the direction upon the learned trial Court i.e. the Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Paschim Medinipur, to adjudicate and dispose of pending J. Misc. Case No.67 of 2024 before it, positively within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order. 7. In the proceeding the Court shall not allow unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties, unless it is satisfied about the cause shown for adjournment sought for by any of 3 the parties, if any to be unavoidable and compelling. Advisably, the Court should also not proceed to allow stay of the pending execution proceeding, filed by the present petitioners, in view of long pendency of the said execution case and the factual background of the case as narrated above. 8. With the observations as above, the instant revision is disposed of. The learned trial Court shall proceed on the basis of the server copy of this order. (Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)