RAMPHER JAISWAL Vs. RAM SUBHAG SHAW
LAWS(CAL)-1960-6-16
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 16,1960

RAMPHER JAISWAL Appellant
VERSUS
RAM SUBHAG SHAW Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

DILWORTH V. COMMISSIONER OF STAMPS [REFERRED TO]
GOKUL BALA RAY V. SARAT CHANDRA GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
GANESH CHANDRA GANGULY V. MAHABIR PROSAD [REFERRED TO]
ANIL CHANDRA GANGULY V. SATI PRASANNA BHOWMICK [REFERRED TO]
RAJIB LOCHAN BANERJEE V. ANIL KUMAR GHOSH [REFERRED TO]
SUBHAS CHANDRA BHATTACHARJEE V. PANCHU RANI DUTTA [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL MAJID VS. SAMIRUDDIN [REFERRED TO]
GOBARDHAN CHANDRA MONDAY VS. JIBAN BALA NANDI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment instituted by the respondent, against the appellant for eviction of the latter from a room in hut No. 27 of premises No. 77, Kailash Bose Street Calcutta. For the purpose of the present litigation we take it that the monthly rent payable for the room art the time of the institution of the suite was Rs. 40/ -. The plaintiff sought to evict the defendant from the disputed room on the ground of reasonable requirement. The suit was contested by the defendant on several grounds to which we need not refer at the present stage.
(2.)DURING the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application under section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 956, for striking out the defence of the defendant against delivery of possession. This application was opposed by the defendant. The application was disposed of by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court on 6th July, 11959. It was allowed and the defence of the defendant against delivery of possession was struck out. Thereafter the suit was heard ex parte and decreed by the court below. So the defendant has preferred this appeal.
(3.)MR. Ghosh, appearing on behalf of defendant appellant, submitted only one point for our consideration in this appeal. He contended that the defence of bis client against delivery of possession was struck out by the court below by an erroneous construction of section 17 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. In order to appreciate whether there is any merit in this contention of Mr. Ghosh we need state the following facts about which there is no dispute.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.