- (1.) The present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against order No.53 dated 31.7.2010 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sealdah in Misc. Case No.24 of 2007 arising out of Ejectment Case No.319/2004.
(2.) Having heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and also after going through the materials-on-record it could be ascertained that the present petitioner by filing ejectment case being No. 319 of 2004 prayed for recovery of khas possession of the suit premises by evicting the opposite party/tenant therefrom. The said suit was decreed ex parte on 26.4.2005, thereafter the opposite party/tenant by filing a Misc. case No.10/2006 under Section 39(14) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 prayed for setting aside the ex parte decree. The said Misc. case was ultimately dismissed. Subsequently, the aggrieved opposite party by filing another Misc. case being No.24 of 2007 sought for restoration of the Misc. case No.10 of 2006 and meanwhile the petitioner/decree-holder put the decree into execution and during the pendency of the execution proceeding opposite party took number of adjournments for bringing stay order from superior forum, but ultimately no stay order could be obtained and submitted before the learned Trial Court and accordingly the execution case proceeded and ended on 6.8.2007 by delivery of possession of the suit premises to the decree-holder/petitioner.
(3.) In this context, it may be pertinent to point out that during the pendency of the execution proceeding being Ejectment Execution Case No.39/2006 which ended on 6.8.2007 as also the Misc. Case No.24/2007, judgment-debtor /opposite party by filing an application sought for certain amendment for insertion of the circumstances under which the Misc. case No.10 was said to have been dismissed for laches on the part of the opposite party. It would be explicit from the materials-on-record that the learned Court below upon hearing the learned Counsel of both sides allowed opposite party s amendment application despite disposal of the execution proceeding case No.39/2006.;