Bhanu Bhaskar v. Ekta Bhaskar

1. This is an application seeking exemption from filing certified copies of the annexures.

CM APP No. 10994/2023

2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

3. Application stands disposed of.

4. The petitioner challenges the order dated 23.02.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court in CS SCJ 522/2022 titled ‘Ekta Bhaskra vs. CM(M) 365/2023 & CM APP No. 10995/2023 (Stay) Bhanu Bhaskar and Ors.’, whereby the respondent no.2/bank herein was directed to arrange for opening the locker on 13.03.2023 and the Manager of respondent no.2/bank was directed to prepare the list of inventory and file the report in that regard before the learned Trial Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is aggrieved of the aforesaid order to the extent that the application under Section 7 of the Family Court Act, 1984 has been pending for quite some time and has not been disposed till date. Learned counsel submits that the learned Trial Court is proceeding with the case without deciding the application, as filed under Section 7 of Family Court Act, 1984.

6. Learned counsel submits that the dispute arises from a matrimonial tussle between the petitioner and respondent no.1, who is the plaintiff before the learned Trial Court.

7. Learned counsel submits that the issue, with respect to the operation of the locker maintained with respondent no.2, arises between the husband and wife and stands fully covered by the judgment passed by this Court in CM(M) 69/2020 ‘Avneet Kaur vs. Sadhu Singh & Anr.’ Neutral Citation No. 2022/DHC/002453 decided on 01.06.2022, and thus prays that the learned Trial Court ought not to have proceeded with the suit without deciding the application under Section 7 of the Family Court Act, 1984.

8. Mr. Sayak Bandyopadhyay, enters appearance on behalf of respondent no.2/bank and reads out to this Court, the prayers in the plaint, whereby the main reliefs of mandatory injunction have been sought by respondent no.1 against respondent no.2/bank. Mr. Bandyopadhyay vehemently objects to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the dispute relates to the matrimonial tussle between the husband and wife. Mr. Bandyopadhyay submits that the bank is a third party to the family dispute between the parties and cannot be subjugated to the jurisdiction exercised by the Family Courts under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for the reason that the bank is a third party having no relation between the parties to the suit insofar as the family disputes are concerned.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied in case a direction to the learned Trial Court is passed for it to hear the application under Section 7 of Family Court Act on the date which is already fixed, i.e., 06.04.2023.

10. In view of the limited prayer as sought by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that the learned Trial Court take up the application under Section 7 of the Family Court Act filed by the petitioner/defendant no.1, on the next date of hearing, i.e. 06.04.2023.

11. In view of the aforesaid, nothing remains to be adjudicated. The petitioner is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. MARCH 6, 2023