Snehasish Bhaumik and Ors. vs WG CDR (Dr.) Somsankar Bhattacharyya and Ors.

Two appeals are taken up for analogous hearing as they emanate out of the same suit.

APOT/129/2026 is at the behest of the defendants to the suit and is directed against the order dated January 29, 2026.

APOT/130/2026 is again at the behest of the same defendants to the suit and is directed against the order dated February 9, 2026.

A suit under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for management and administration of a society registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961, was instituted in this Court.

By the impugned order dated January 29, 2026, learned Single Judge granted leave under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865 to institute the suit.

Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits referring to Section 19 of the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 that, the suit is essentially against a society registered under the Act of 1961 and cannot be construed as duly instituted in view of the provisions of Section 19 thereof. He draws the attention of the Court to the description of the parties in the plaint, particularly the defendant no. 1.

Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, there is no commonality of interest amongst the plaintiffs for Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to be invoked.

Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that, since, the suit itself is not maintainable, question of passing an interim order does not arise.

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiffs/respondents submits that, leave under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Order II Rule 2 thereof were obtained by the impugned order dated January 29, 2026. He submits that, leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865 was also granted.

Referring to the interim order passed on February 9, 2026, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiffs/respondents submits that, no prejudice is caused to any of the appellants. He submits that, the assets of the society require protection and preservation till the disposal of the suit. Interim order dated February 9, 2026 seeks to do that. No interference is called for.

There is an issue of limitation involved in preferring the appeal. Considering the averments made in the application for condonation of delay and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay in making and filing both the appeals.

By the order dated February 9, 2026, learned Single Judge passed an ad interim order permitting the appellants to sell an ambulance which is 14 years of age, after informing the plaintiffs with regard thereto. Learned Single Judge passed an order of injunction restraining the appellants from dealing with the immovable properties of the society. Learned Single Judge also directed disclosure of accounts.

We find from the records that, the order dated January 29, 2026 is an order which grants leave to the plaintiffs to institute the suit under Order I Rule 8, Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as also Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865.

The order dated January 29, 2026 was passed ex parte. Appellants before us are at liberty to apply for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865, if so advised. Appellants are also at liberty to raise the issue of maintainability of the suit on the ground that the society remains mis-described in the cause title of the plaint, if so advised.

Appellants are also at liberty to apply for revocation of Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Order II Rule 2 thereof, if so advised.

Since, the order dated January 29, 2026 was passed ex parte, we are not minded to interfere therein at this stage.

So far as the order dated February 9, 2026 is concerned, we find that, the suit relates to the management of a society. Without prejudice to the issue as to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of Section 19 of the Act of 1961, we find that, the assets of the society require protection and preservation. Learned Single Judge proceeded to put in place a mechanism by the order impugned dated February 9, 2026. Such order does not prejudice any of the rights of any of the parties.

Learned Single Judge also ascribed cogent reasons for grant of the interim order as recorded on February 9, 2026.

In such circumstances, we are not minded to interfere with the order dated February 9, 2026 at this stage. All points raised by the parties in this regard are kept open to be decided.

APOT/129/2026 and APOT/130/2026 along with pending application are disposed of accordingly.

I agree.