OD-11 & 12 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT/149/2026 In CSOS/5/2024 IA No. GA/1/2026 BABU BHATTACHARJEE AND ORS -VS- RONENDRA CHOWDHURY AND ORS AND APOT/150/2026 In CSOS/5/2024 IA No. GA/1/2026 SUVENDU PATRA AND ORS -VS- RONENDRA CHOWDHURY AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK -AND- The Hon’ble JUSTICE ARYAK DUTT Date: September 10, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Pintu Karar, Adv. Mr. Akashdeep Mukherjee, Adv. ...for the appellants Mr. Saumalya Ganguli, Adv. ...for the respondents/plaintiffs Mr. Saumyen Dutta, Adv. Mr. Samrat Das, Adv. ...for the 236 added persons The Court: Two appeals are taken up analogously as they involve same issues. 2 Both the appeals are directed against order dated May 6, 2025 passed in CSOS/5/2024. Essentially by the impugned order, learned Single Judge rejected the prayer for addition of parties in the pending originating summons suit. Application of the two appellants before us stood rejected by the impugned order. Impugned order dated May 6, 2025 received consideration of the Co- ordinate Bench in APO/5/2026 at the behest of some other appellants. Co-ordinate Bench disposed of APO/5/2026 by an order dated June 9, 2026. By such order dated June 9, 2026, Co-ordinate Bench allowed the appellants therein to be added as party defendants to the pending originating summons suit. Co-ordinate Bench kept all issues open including the issue of the tenure of the Trust to be decided by the learned Trial Judge. Some of the respondents are represented. One set of respondents being the plaintiffs do not object to the prayer of addition of party being allowed. Since, according to such set of respondents, the appellants before us stand on a similar footing as that of the appellants in APO/5/2026. The other set of respondents being added defendants object to the prayer being allowed. According to such respondents, the appellants are yet to disclose any locus with regard to the pending originating summons suit. Appellants before us claim themselves to be former employees of a legal entity in respect of which, a Trust was created for the purpose of disbursing the benefits to the employees of such legal entity. 3 The issue of entitlement, if any, of such former employees out of the proceeds of the Trust is kept open to be decided by the learned Single Judge in the originating summons suit. All other points raised by the parties are also kept open. Since the appellants claim themselves to be former employees of the legal entity in respect of which the Trust was formed and since, the originating summons suit seeks relief with regard to such Trust, it would be appropriate to add the appellants before us as party defendants in CSOS/5/2024. Plaintiff in CSOS/5/2024 will take appropriate steps for addition of the appellants as party defendants. In default, the appellants before us may take appropriate steps before the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, APOT/149/2026 along with IA No. GA/1/2026 and APOT/150/2026 along with IA No. GA/1/2026 are disposed of, without any order as to costs. (DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) (ARYAK DUTT, J.) sp3