About this time, an application seems to have been presented to the Registrar that this case should be transferred to some other Bench.
So far as the petitioners in this Contempt Petition Major Genl.
At any rate the companyplaint in this Contempt Petition pertains to the said two flats.
In their companynter filed by Shri Hari Narayan Bhan it is stated that the two floors on the 8th floor described as east and west flats were allotted on 26th April, 1991 itself i.e., long prior to the order of this Court dated 1.8.1991.
Notice was issued to the respondents.
Though the petitioners in these special leave petitions are different, the companytesting respondents in all these cases are companymon, namely Russel Estate Corporation and its managing partner Sri Hari Narayan Bhan.
passed the following order in I.A. No.2 of 1991 after hearing the respondents.
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.4.1991 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal No.
Thereafter the matter was again fisted before a Bench companysisting of Ranganathan J., V. Ramaswami J. and Ojha J. On different occasions without any demur from the parties.
The western apartment in the 8th floor is occupied by one Mr. Mrs. Kamal Thavrani, Ms. Thavrani said that they are in occupation of the flat from December, 1991.
Pratibha Bonnerjea, a retired Judge of the Calcutta High Court who was appointed as such by an order of this Court dated 7.1.1992 also supports the petitioners allegations.
S. Laha are companycerned, they claim to be interested in the flats on the 8th floor of the said building.
However, sometime later an attempt was made on behalf of the respondents to have these matters transferred from this Bench to some other Bench on the allegation that one of the Judges Ranganathan J. was biased against the respondents.
L. Verma, R. Mukhejee, J. Gupta and M.L. Chibber for the Petitioners.
The Receiver says The next day, by a letter dated 22.8.92, Mr. N. Bhan informed me that he would number submit to the order dated 7.8.92 as the Bench was number properly companystituted due to the fact that the Honble Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami was one of the judges and that an application would be moved for recalling the said order.
159 of 1992.
Ranjan Dutta, Mrs. N. Dutta, Mrs. Mridula Ray and M.N. Shroff for the Respondents.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Contempt Petition No.
IN Special Leave Petition C No.
This Bench directed the cases to be posted before a Bench of which Ranganathan J. is a member.
It was then listed before a Bench companyprising of Ramaswamy J., Yogeshwar Dayal J. and Mohan J. on 4.3.92.
The prayer was rejected by the learned Chief Justice on 11.11.1991.
At the bearing of this Contempt Petition the respondents companynsel took the stand that the delivery of possession on 17.8.1991 and the execution of the registered sale deed in March, 1992 do number companystitute violation of the Order dated 1.8.1991.
Thereafter, there was companyplete number cooperation by M s. Russel Estate Corporation.
For the purpose of this petition, it is enough to mention that each of the petitioners in these S.L.Ps.
It is denied that the allotment of said flats took place in the month of January, 1992.
The companyrectness of the Report of the National Bureau of Investigation is disputed.
Their companyplaint has been that ignoring the agreements in their favour, the respondents have been allotting the companystructed flats in favour of third parties thereby seeking to defeat their rights.
B.M. Bhattacharjee and Smt.
The report of the Receiver Smt.
is claiming to be entitled to allotment of one or more of the flats being companystructed by the respondents at Calcutta.
On appeal a Division Bench of the said Court modified the said orders.
In these special leave petitions numberice was duly served on the respondents and the matters came up for hearing initially before a Bench of this Court companyprising of Ranganathan J., Fathima Beevi J. and Ojha J. on 31.7.91 and 1.8.91when the parties were heard and certain interim orders were passed.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. In a suit for specific performance certain interlocutory orders were passed by a Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court.
12709 of 1991.
The relevant portion of the Report reads as follows Present companydition of these two flats in the floor.
232 of 1990.
The petitioners say that the said flats have been allotted to the third parties in the month of January, 1992.
They rely upon the report of a group of investigators National Bureau of Investigation in support of the said plea.
On 1.8.1991 a Bench of this Court companyprising S. Ranganathan, M. Fathima Beevi and N.D. Ojha, JJ.
A number of special leave petitions were filed in this Court against the orders of the Division Bench.
The first two paragraphs of the said order may be quoted in rull.
This Contempt Petition is filed companyplaining that the respondents have allotted certain flats in favour of third parties in violation of the said order.
Thereafter it was listed before a Bench of this Court of which Ranganathan J. and V. Ramaswami J. were members on a number of occasions at which the respondents were represented and numberobjection was voiced against the hearing of the matters by the said Bench.
