MODULA INDIA Vs. KAMAKHYA SINGHDEO
LAWS(CAL)-2014-3-75
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on March 14,2014

MODULA INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
Kamakhya Singhdeo Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated August 24, 2012 passed in C. S. No.568 of 1979. The above suit was decreed on contests with costs against the defendant/appellant. The plaintiff/respondent got a decree for recovery of possession against the appellant by evicting him from the suit premises with a direction upon the appellant to deliver khas possession of the suit premises. The respondent also got a decree for recovery of Rs.40,950/- against the appellant as damages. The decree of mesne profits was passed in favour of the respondent from the date of institution of the suit till the date of delivery of khas possession of the suit premises in his favour, the quantum of which was directed to be determined in a separate proceeding under Order 20 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The facts of the case are as under: The respondent was the owner of the suit premises. At the request made by the appellant by a communication dated December 28, 1977, the respondent allowed the appellant to occupy the Flat No.3 lying and situated on the ground floor of the suit premises till January 31, 1978 on payment of Rs.1,000/- towards rent. In the communication under reference not only the request was made to allow the appellant to occupy the Flat under reference till January 31, 1978, there was an undertaking to vacate the above Flat on February 1, 1978. After getting the possession of the Flat under reference, the appellant did not deliver the vacant possession of the same on the basis of his undertaking dated December 28, 1977. The appellant forwarded four cheques of Rs.1,000/- each to the respondent towards rent for the months of March, 1978 to June, 1978. The respondent did not encash those cheques. Again the appellant sent Rs.1,000/- as rent to the respondent in or about September/October, 1978 towards the rent for one month and the respondent refused to accept the same.
(3.) Since the appellant did not deliver the vacant possession of the Flat under reference in the suit premises, the respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal arises.;


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