BANAMALI DEBNATH Vs. DEBASISH BHOWMIK
HIGH COURT TRIPURA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)Heard Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant.
(2.)This is an appeal under Section 100 of the CPC from the judgment dated 16.04.2018 delivered in T.A. No.05 of 2016 by the Additional District Judge, Unakoti Judicial District, Kamalpur [as it then was].
(3.)Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant at the outset has submitted that two substantial questions, the appellant would like to propose viz.
(i) Whether treating of the advocate notice dated 06.11.2015 as the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is perverse, inasmuch as, the said advocate notice was not admitted in the evidence?
(ii) Whether the plaintiff-respondent in his cross- examination having categorically stated that if the defendant had paid the rent due since July,2015 along with interest and cost of the suit, he would not have been interested to evict can maintain the suit, inasmuch as, the defendant is inclined to pay the rent since July,2015 with interest and cost of the suit?
The basic facts for purpose of considering those proposed substantial questions of law may be laid at the outset. The suit is for declaration of the right, title and interest and recovery of possession of the suit land, as described in the schedule of the plaint, pertaining to R/S Plot No.1188, Khatian No.904 of Mouza Kamalpur.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.