JHUMA BHATTACHARYYA CHIRANJIB SINHA vs ABHIJIT BHATTACHARYA AND ANR — CO/82/2026
Case under Specific Relief Act ,1963 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 12th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0010552026
Next Hearing
19th January 2026
Filing Number
CO/79/2026
Filing Date
08-01-2026
Registration No
CO/82/2026
Registration Date
08-01-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP B (CIVIL MATTERS) ( 2 )
Sub-Category
Miscellaneous ( 57 )
Judicial Branch
RULE SECTION
Decision Date
12th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JHUMA BHATTACHARYYA CHIRANJIB SINHA
Respondent(s)
ABHIJIT BHATTACHARYA AND ANR
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI
NEW MOTION
UPGRADED MOTION
UPGRADED MOTION
MOTION
MOTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-01-2026 | NEW MOTION |
| 12-06-2026 | UPGRADED MOTION |
| 11-06-2026 | UPGRADED MOTION |
| 19-05-2026 | MOTION |
| 18-05-2026 | MOTION |
Orders
Case Summary: CO/82/2026 The court dismissed Jhuma Bhattacharyya's revisional petition challenging the trial court's rejection of her amendment application. The petitioner sought to add a counter-claim for her share in properties (11 and 11A Ruby Park) during the evidence stage of a partition suit. The court upheld the rejection, finding the petitioner lacked due diligence in filing the amendment after trial commenced, especially since the factual basis was within her knowledge. Critically, a prior partition suit (Title Suit 153/2015) concerning the same properties was already pending before the same court, making the counter-claim unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CO/82/2026 The court dismissed Jhuma Bhattacharyya's revisional petition challenging the trial court's rejection of her amendment application. The petitioner sought to add a counter-claim for her share in properties (11 and 11A Ruby Park) during the evidence stage of a partition suit. The court upheld the rejection, finding the petitioner lacked due diligence in filing the amendment after trial commenced, especially since the factual basis was within her knowledge. Critically, a prior partition suit (Title Suit 153/2015) concerning the same properties was already pending before the same court, making the counter-claim unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts