20.08.2026 Court No.8 Item No.23 (nb) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI C.O. 117 of 2026 Lal Chand Prasad Vs. Central Bank of India & Ors. Mr. Suman Sengupta, Mr. Bijoy Bikram Das, ….for the petitioner. 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. None appears on behalf of the respondents. 3. This revisional application has been filed by the plaintiff/petitioner for expeditious disposal of the proceeding pending before the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division) at Alipurduar. 4. Today, the matter was fixed for filing supplementary affidavit along with other order showing submission of the valuation report. 5. The learned advocate representing the petitioner strenuously argued that the valuation report was submitted before the court long back and despite that on repeated occasions, the dates are fixed for filing of such valuation report. It is further contended that the plaintiff has already filed an objection to the said valuation report and annexed 2 the valuation report dated August 7, 2023 by Mr. Susanta Kr. Ghosh alongwith the supplementary affidavit. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further drawn attention of this Court to the order passed by the learned Court on June 30, 2023 when the valuation reported was submitted by Mr. Puranjay Konar against which an objection was filed by the both the parties. Subsequently, an order was given for appointment of another valuer and after that , the subsequent valuation report was submitted. 7. The further contention made before this Court is that during the pendency of filing report, the valuer appointed by the plaintiff namely, Banibrata Mukherjee also submitted his report. Despite the facts and circumstances, the dates are fixed for filing of valuation report and lastly fixed on August 6, 2026 for hearing of petition of valuation report as last chance. Therefore, it is apparent that several orders are passed only adjourning the matter on account of filing valuation report since long . 8. The order dated November 25, 2021 passed in F.A 41 of 2020, reflects that the decree passed earlier was set aside and a direction was given to the defendants to pay mesne profits @ 10,000/- per mensem with effect from July, 2001 with a request to the learned Trial Court to determine the mesne 3 profits in accordance with law in terms of the order preferably within the period of one year. However the proceeding is pending since long as discussed above. 9. Be that as it may, the petitioners prayed for expeditious disposal of suit filed by the plaintiff and Considering the nature of prayer the opposite parties are not called to contest as direction to expeditious hearing of the proceeding will cause prejudice to any of the parties. 10. In view of the above facts and circumstances and considering the number of orders passed as reflected from the certified copy as discussed above, the learned Court is hereby directed to make an endeavour to dispose of the applications if any pending for acceptance of valuation report after ascertaining if any valuation report has already been filed and in any event to pass necessary order in accordance with law which can expedite the process for final disposal of the suit. 11. The learned Court is further directed to consider the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court whereby the period for disposal of the mesne profits was stipulated within a year and the Title Suit where the limited issue to be determined on mesne profit is pending since thereafter. 12. Hence, this revisional application is disposed of. 4 13. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case, hence the allegations if any, made against the opposite parties are not treated to be admitted by the Court in any manner. 1. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Chaitali Chatterjee(Das), J.)