Court No. 6 (265719) 24.08.2026 (AD 11) (S. Banerjee) CO 3561 of 2025 Sandeep Goenka Vs. Yes Bank Limited & Ors. Mr. Pratyush Patwari Mr. Mostafizur Rahaman Ms. Shilpi Sarkar …for the petitioner Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly Ms. Srijani Ghosh Ms. Simrin Hussain …for the opposite-party no. 1 This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against order no. 6 dated August 18, 2025 passed by the learned Judge 7th Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 1804 of 2024. By the order impugned the learned trial judge extended the time to file the written objection to the injunction application. Mr. Patwari, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that when the Hon’ble Division Bench while disposing of a miscellaneous appeal by a judgment and order dated February 17, 2025 fixed the time limit for filing the written objection to be filed by the opposite-party herein, no further extension could have been granted by the learned trial judge. In support of such contention he places reliance upon a 2 decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of D. V. Paul –Vs.- Manisha Lalwani, reported at AIR 2010 SC 3356. Heard the learned advocate appearing for the opposite party no. 1. He submits that in the event the Court is inclined to accept the submission of the learned advocate for the petitioner, a liberty be given to the opposite-party to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in D. V. Paul (supra) held that the power to fix the time for doing of an act carries with it the power to extend such period, depending upon whether the party in default makes out a case to the satisfaction of the court who has fixed the time limit. The said decision shall squarely apply to the facts of the case on hand. The Hon'ble Division Bench has fixed a time limit for filing the written objection. This Court is of the considered view that the learned trial judge could not have extended the time to file the written objection to the injunction application. For such reason this Court is inclined to interfere with the order impugned. 3 Accordingly, the order dated August 18, 2025 passed by the learned Judge 7th Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 1804 of 2024 is set aside. This revisional application stands disposed of by giving liberty to the opposite-party to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law for extension of time to file the written objection. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)