SRI GOPAL BHATTACHARJEE Vs. SRI DWIJEN KUMAR ROY AND ANOTHER
LAWS(CAL)-2011-11-85
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on November 30,2011

Sri Gopal Bhattacharjee Appellant
VERSUS
Sri Dwijen Kumar Roy And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Tarun Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 29th March, 2001 passed by learned Additional District Judge, 9th Court at Alipore in Title Appeal No.286 of 1999 confirming the judgment and decree of eviction dated 4th of October, 1999 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court, Alipore in Title Suit No.299 of 1990.
(2.) Respondent No.1 Dwijen Kumar Roy being plaintiff filed a suit being Title Suit No.299 of 1990 in the learned Trial Court alleging that he was the owner of the suit property and allowed defendant No.1 Chandi Charan Nandy to reside there as his licensee in 1976 on condition that Chandi Charan Nandi would vacate the same on demand. Chandi Charan Nandi wrongfully and without knowledge of the plaintiff handed over possession of the same to defendant No.2 Gopal Bhattacharjee. Plaintiff revoked his leave and licence granted to defendant No.1 Chandi Charan Nandy by sending a notice dated 12th of April, 1990. In spite of receipt of said notice defendant No.1 did not deliver vacant possession of the suit property to the plaintiff. Accordingly, plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of possession on revocation of licence, against both defendant No.1 and defendant No.2.
(3.) Defendant No.1 Chandi Charan Nandi filed a written statement denying material allegations of the plaint and contending inter alia that he did not know either the plaintiff or the suit property and there was no question of residing in suit property as a licensee under plaintiff at any point of time. He was a permanent resident of Baidyapur under P. S. Kalna, District Burdwan. He lived for some period in a rented house at 19/2, Russa Road (S) 3rd Lane during his student days. After completion of his studies he left said rented house and continued to reside in his house at Baidyapur in the year 1975. He did not induct defendant No.2 Gopal Bhattacharjee in the suit property. Defendant No.2 used to reside in the suit property and carried business after keeping building materials thereupon. The suit was liable to be dismissed with cost.;


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