07.10.2026 Ct. No. 654 Sl. No. 34 Subadip CO 1695 of 2026 Shibananda Dutta & Ors. VS China Dey & Anr. Mr. Abhrajit Roy Chowdhury, Mr. Dipankar Bhakta. …for the petitioners Ms. Utsa Podder ….for the opposite party no.2 1. The petitioner and the opposite party no.2 are represented. The opposite party no.1 is not appearing. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by and order dated 19th March, 2026 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Krishnanagar, Nadia. 3. The petitioners submits that although he is not affected by the order. The learned Trial Judge made certain observations in the order impugned which affects the right of the petitioners. It is the petitioner’s case that his right to contest the suit has been taken away by the order impugned. The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the opposite party no.1 has filed a caveat before this Court and accordingly, the petitioners have served of this petition on the caveat. None appears for the opposite party no.1 today. 2 4. In view of the submissions made by the petitioner and after going through the records and disposed of C.O. 1695 of 2026 by directing that no observations made by the Trial Court. In the impugned order dated 19th March, 2026 shall not affect any right of the petitioner to contest the said suit. It is made clear that the nature of the order that has been passed herein will not affect the opposite party no.1 in any manner whatsoever. I have only kept open the petitioner’s right to contest the suit in accordance with law. 5. With the observations, C.O. 1695 of 2026 is disposed of. 6. This further clarified that the rejection of the written objections of the petitioners by the learned Trial Court is set aside and the learned Trial Court is directed to take such written objection of the petitioners into consideration while deciding the suit. (Aryak Dutt, J.)