TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 903X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the remedy under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is barred and he cannot file this petition. The facts of the present case do not warrant any interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being a second revision under the garb of Section 482 Cr.P.C. The present petition is neither maintainable nor is there any merit in the same. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed on both counts, i.e., on the question of maintainability as well as on merits. - Keeping in view the age of the case and also the nature of the offence, the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta is directed to dispose of this case finally as expeditiously as possible without giving any unnecessary adjournment. - C.R.R. NO. 159 OF 2011 - - - Dated:- 18-3-2015 - SHIB S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in-charge of the operations of Mumbai region and from time to time he visited Mumbai for furtherance of company's business and for that the company permitted him to occupy the company's flats being Flat Nos.3 4 on the second floor, Laxmi Building at premises No.35/37, J.S.S. Road, Kennedy Bridge, Mumbai-400004. On 07.01.1984 Gokuleswar Ghosh died in harness. The petitioner/accused is his daughter and she has been illegally and wrongfully using and occupying the said flats. The company repeatedly requested the accused/petitioner to return and/or deliver vacant possession of the said flats but she failed and neglected / or refused to hand over the vacant possession of the said flats to the Company. She is in illegal and wrongful occ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta did not commit any wrong or illegality by passing the impugned order which is very much just, proper and legal in the eye of law and he, therefore, found no reasons to interfere. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has now approached this Court with the instant Revisional Application. 4. I have heard Mr. Tirthankar Ghosh, Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Milan Mukherjee, Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2. I have also perused all the available materials on record including the impugned order and judgment with meticulous care. 5. Mr. Ghosh, Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the case and that the case is maintainable against the accused. Against such order, the petitioner preferred revision which was dismissed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, after concurring with such findings. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to reagitate the same issue before this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. He submitted yet further that the present petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court praying for transfer of the complaint case being case No.C/8660 of 2006 from the Court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta to a competent Court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai mainly on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. On hearing both sides and on giving a close and critical look into the Revisional Application and its Annexures I find with surprise that the petitioner has not annexed the copy of her application dated 08.02.2007 filed by her before the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta challenging the maintainability of the case. Be that as it may, the said petition was dismissed on 23.06.2008 on merits. She preferred a revision against the order of dismissal but could not get any relief and the revision was also dismissed being devoid of any merit. Feeling aggrieved with the order of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, this petition has been filed on the same and identical grounds on which the first revision was filed. 9. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies. We do not find any merit in this Transfer Petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the aforesaid order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is a speaking order and on merits. 12. The facts of the present case do not warrant any interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being a second revision under the garb of Section 482 Cr.P.C. The present petition is neither maintainable nor is there any merit in the same. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed on both counts, i.e., on the question of maintainability as well as on merits. 13. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 14. Keeping in view the age of the case and also the nature of the offence, the Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
