A.K. Mitra, J. - (1.) THESE three Second Appeals arise out of three title suits namely T.S. No. 298 of 1966 and M.S. No. 89 of 1966 (correspondingly T.A. No. 791 of 1974/S.A. No. 466), M.S. 89 of 1966 (correspondingly T.A. No. 140 of T974/S.A. No. 468), T:S. No. 507 of. 1966 (correspondingly T.A. No. 790 of 1974/S.A. No. 46.7 of 1976). T.S. No. 298 of 1966 was filed by Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee against Ambika Banerjee. M.S. No. 89 of 1966 has been filed for recovery of mesne profit from June 7, 1966 to November 23, 1966 filed by Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee against Ambika Banerjee. T.S. No. 507 of 1966 filed by Ambika Banerjee against Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee for declaration that the Plaintiff is the owner in respect of 16 annas of the suit premises and the Nadabi Patras dated June T4, 1960 are mere paper transactions and 50 such documents and Bibhuti and his . wife are mere name lenders and also praying for injunction,
(2.) THE case as has been made out in the plaint of Title Suit No. 298 of 1966 is inter alia as follows: Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee and his wife purchased the suit property on the basis of the separate title deeds dated August 27, 1997 from one Sailendra Nath Sanyal at a valuable consideration of Rs. 16,000/ - (Rs. 9,500/ - and Rs. 6,500/ -) arid Ambika quited the possession on execution of two deeds of disclaimer in favour of the former on June 15, 1960. Ambika, a bachelor being in financial distress wanted a shelter under Bibhuti at the premises No. 26, Rani Branch Road, Calcutta 02 in a room. He was granted accommodation and subsequently on the plea of marriage of his nephew Ambika obtained temporary licence for three rooms in the 1st floor and the mezanine room in the said premises. With a view to help Ambika his service was requisitioned by Bibhuti as a Rent Collector but Ambika betrayed the trust reposed on him and failed to account for receipts of rent. Besides Ambika lost the confidence of Bibhuti also on his refusal to vacate the suit premises after the marriage of his nephew. Accordingly, Ambika's licence was revoked by a notice w.e.f. July 16, 1966. As Ambika failed to vacate the said premises, Title Suit No. 298 of 66 was instituted, for eviction of Ambika from the suit premises and Money Suit No. 89/66 was filed for recovery of mesne profits from June 17, 1966 to November 23, 1966. Ambika's case is. that on or about August 28, 1991 he took lease of the vacant land at 26, Rani Branch Road from Sailendra Nath Sanyal for a period of 20 years with an option of renewal for a further period of 5 years at a rental of Rs. 44/ - per month in the benami of - his trusted friend Sri Harinarayan Dey, on the basis of a registered deed of lease.
(3.) AS per the terms of the lease the lessee had the right to construct structure at the: leasehold; land and accordingly Ambika got plan sanctioned in the benami of Harinarayan Dey and subsequently Ambika raised a two storeyed building and a shed in the year 1954 by his own money. Ambika used to occupy a portion of the said building after letting, out the remaining portion to the tenants and machineries of the printing works were kept in the shed. Ambika had a printing press under the name and style Nistari Printing Works and from October, 1949 he became a government contractor. As a result the Government of India from time to time supplied various paper blocs for printing and binding and those were stored in the different godowns. On or about August 22, 1952 one of the godowns was destroyed by' fire and thereafter the Union Government filed a suit in the High Court at Calcutta against Ambika for realisation" of Rs. 4,99,475 -6 -6 being the price of goods delivered to him. Ambika contested the claim by filing a written statement and in turn he brought a cross suit against the Government for realisation of Rs. 3,16,842 -10 -9 being the amount due on different bills submitted by Ambika." Both the suits were hotly contested and those are still pending. Thereafter Ambika closed down his business and removed all his printing machinaries and accessories from the shed of the suit property. Then Ambika wanted to purchase the leasehold land in the suit premises from Sailendra Nath Sanyal and on November 2, 1954 the price was finally settled at Rs. 16,000/ - and on that very date Ambika made over a complete set of Printing Press machinary valued at Rs. 9,000/ - to Sailendra Nath Sanyal in part payment of the said price. Out of the balance of Rs. 7,000/ -Rs. 1,000/ - was paid in cash and the vendor agreed to take the balance of Rs. 6,000/ - by instalment and as such a formal agreement was simultaneously executed in the name of Ambika or his nominee on receiving the consideration. On July 15, 1966 Ambika paid Rs. 1,000/ -and on July 16, 1966 he paid the balance of Rs. 5,000/ -to Sri Sanyal and thus on payment of entire consideration amount Ambika became the full owner of the land measuring 5 1/2 kottah and Ambika was the owner of the structures thereon and in fact he became the full owner of the entire premises at 26, Rani Branch Road, Calcutta. Ambika further stated that he had his ancestral dwelling house at 102, Jatindra Mohan Avenue, Calcutta and being fade up with constant quarrel there he left the said house to the new constructed building in the suit premises. After coming to 26, Rani Branch Road, Ambika -developed affection for his friend who was a friend from his boyhood, Bibhuti Banerjee and his wife Ivy Lata. The intimacy depend to such an extent that Bibhuti and his wife became the friends, philosophers and guides of Ambika who in his turn kept with them all the valuable documents for safe custody with much trust. Looking at the facts that entire price of the suit land was fully paid up by Ambika, Bibhuti and his wife have repeatedly urged him to have a sale deed registered by Sailendra Nath Sanyal but as it was not advisable to take the sale deed in the name of Ambika, two sale deeds were executed in the name of Bibhuti and his wife at their suggestion. Thus Bibhuti and his wife were mere name lenders in the said deeds of sale executed by Sailendra Nath Sanyal and absolutely untrue statements were made in the said deeds only with a view to give it a look of real transaction. Bibhuti and his wife were all along aware of the real state of things and even after the creation of the said benami deeds Ambika remained in absolute possession of the suit property. Subsequently, in the year 1960 Bibhuti and his wife led Ambika to be believe that in order to put up the show of a real transfer it was further necessary or Ambika to execute two more documents in the shape of Nadabi Patras in favour of them and being mislead Ambika executed two separate 'Nadabi' in favour of Bibhuti and his wife making false and distorted statement of facts therein. In April 1966 Ambika with his brother Sri Usha Charan Banerjee with his family came to live there to perform the marriage ceremony of the eldest son. After the marriage of Usha Charan Banerjee's son Ambika fell ill and his left side got paralysed partially due to an attack of blood pressure and at that time Usha Charan and his family members nursed Ambika and looking at this Bibhuti and his wife became irritated and they requested Ambika to part with the company of the brother and his family. As no heed was paid to their requests Bibhuti and his wife were displeased and they picked up quarrels with Usha Charan and the members of his family. Being suspicious about the attitude of Bibhuti and his wife, Ambika was disillusioned and asked them to hand over all the papers and documents that were lying with them and also wanted accounts of the money that was being handled by Bibhuti. Then Bibhuti through his lawyer gave a notice upon Ambika asking him to vacate his suit premises on the false allegations that Ambika was a mere licensee. A reply was sent to Bibhuti on behalf of Ambika denying all the allegations. Thereafter Bibhuti instituted the above suits for eviction and mesne profit with false allegations. Thus, Ambika's title in the suit property having been clouded, he instituted the Title Suit No. 560 of 1966 praying for declaration that he is 16 annas owner in respect of the suit property, that Bibhuti and his wife are mere name lenders and have acquired to interest in the suit property by virtue of the alleged sale deeds - and Nadabi Patras, that the Nadabi Patras are mere paper transactions and fictitious documents, and also for delivery of those documents in the Court for cancellation and also for permanent injunction restraining Bibhuti and his wife from interfering with or disturbing the possession of Ambika in the suit property. Sri Harinarayan Dey and Sailendra Nath Sanyal are also added as proforma Defendants in the said title suit.;