Court No. 6 (265719) 15.09.2026 (AD 15) (S. Banerjee) CO 3135 of 2026 Prasenjit Show & Ors. Vs. Baidyanath Show Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das Mr. Bishal Maity Ms. Tithli Piplai …for the petitioners This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against an order dated August 13, 2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Uluberia, Howrah in Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 2026. The petitioners filed a suit for declaration of right, title, interest and possession of the plaintiffs upon declaring that the registered trust deed dated December 18, 1991 has not been acted upon and the same is a product of false representation, coercion, undue influence and the right, title and interest could not have passed upon the defendant no. 1 on the strength of a registered deed of trust dated December 18, 1991 and for permanent injunction. After filing of the suit the petitioners filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code praying for temporary injunction 2 restraining the defendant no. 1/opposite-party no. 1 herein, from causing disturbance to the peaceful possession in respect of the suit property or from changing the nature and character of the suit property. The learned trial judge upon considering the injunction application noted that the petitioners failed to establish possession in respect of the suit property by producing documents in support thereof. In the light of the said observation, the learned trial judge refused to pass an ad interim order of injunction. Being aggrieved by such order, the petitioners have approached the appellate court and the learned Judge of the appellate Court refused to pass an ad interim order of injunction. Considering the fact that the petitioners have challenged a registered deed of trust dated December 18, 1991 and also that the petitioners failed to prove their possession in respect of the suit property even prima facie, this Court is not inclined to pass any interim order at this stage. Keeping this matter pending will not enure to the benefit of the petitioners. After hearing the learned advocate for the petitioners and considering the materials available on record, this Court feels that interest of justice would 3 be sub-served if the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court at Uluberia, Howrah is directed to dispose of the Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 2026 expeditiously. Accordingly, this revisional application stands disposed of by requesting the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court at Uluberia, Howrah to make an endeavour to dispose of Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 2026 as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)