SIDDHARTHA CHATTOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) This civil revisional application is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28th January, 2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division) 4th Court at Alipore, District - (South) 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 833 of 2010. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order of the learned Court below the plaintiff/petitioner has come before this Court with a prayer for setting aside the impugned order and to pass a decree for recovery of khas possession in respect of one bed room on the ground floor at Premises No. 1/27 Rupchand Mukherjee Lane, Calcutta -700025. The petitioner herein being plaintiff had instituted an ejectment Suit being No. 478 of 2008 before the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division) 4th Court at Alipore, against the present opposite party/defendant for recovery of khas possession on the ground that the present defendant had acquired a flat at Premises No. 88, at present 11, Beltala Road Police Station -Bhowanipore, Kolkata -700025. He got an ex parte decree on 23.01.2009. As in spite of getting the decree that defendant/opposite party did not vacate the suit premises, he had to file an ejectment execution case bearing No. 1 of 2010 and obtained possession of the said premises through the Court bailiff on 2nd March, 2010. Soon after getting the possession, the defendant/opposite party with his henchmen and police dispossessed him and trespassed into the said premises by breaking open the padlock forcibly. In such circumstances, he has again filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act for recovery of khas possession.
(2.) Before the Court below the defendant/opposite party contended that the present petitioner/plaintiff had trespassed into the suit premises with some anti -socials and broke the padlock of main entrance road and thrown out his articles on the road. He had lodged a written complaint at Bhowanipore Police Station. The police arrested the plaintiff/petitioner and thereafter, the defendant/opposite party has got back his possession.
(3.) It appears from the LCR that the learned Trial Court has recorded evidence of both parties and dismissed the said execution case on the ground that the bailiff report is not a public document.;