JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA,J. - (1.) This second miscellaneous appeal is directed against an order being No. 177 dated 7th June, 2014 passed by the learned Judge, 2nd Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Misc. Case No. 12 of 2013. By the impugned order, the appellant's application under Order 21 Rules 99 and 101 of the Civil Procedure Code filed by the appellant was rejected on contest by the learned Trial Judge. Hence, the appellant was aggrieved. She then filed the instant appeal.
(2.) Let us now consider as to whether there is any merit in this appeal for which the appeal is required to be admitted for hearing under the provision of Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure or not. The suit premises is situated at 12, Kyd Street, Kolkata -700016. Admittedly one Kedarnath Upadhyay was a tenant under Iran Society which was represented by its General Secretary, namely, M. A. Majid. The said tenant Kedarnath Upadhyay died on 7th September, 1974. After his death, an eviction suit was filed against his son viz. Santosh Kumar Upadhyay on the ground of default in payment of rent and also for sub -letting the suit premises to one Ajit Bose. Santosh Kumar Upadhyay did not contest the said suit. The said suit was ultimately decreed ex parte.
(3.) Thereafter, one Arati Upadhyay claiming to be the second wife of Kedarnath Upadhyay filed a suit to establish her tenancy right in respect of the suit premises which she claimed to have inherited from her husband Kedarnath Upadhyay. The said suit was ultimately dismissed for default. Subsequently when the decree for eviction passed against Santosh Kumar Upadhyay was put into execution, Debasish Upadhyay claiming to be the son of Kedarnath Upadhyay through Arati filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Civil Procedure Code to establish that the decree which was passed against Santosh Kumar Upadhyay is not binding upon Debasish as he was not a party in the suit and no decree for eviction was passed against him. In that Order 21 Rule 97 proceeding, marriage of Arati with Kedarnath Upadhyay was disputed. Incidentally it may be mentioned herein that after the death of Kedarnath, Arati married Ajit Bose who was alleged to be the sub -tenant under Santosh Kumar Upadhyay. To establish the marriage between Kedarnath and Arati not only Debasish gave evidence in the said proceeding but Anuradha, the appellant herein also gave evidence in the said proceeding. Birth certificate of Anuradha showing that she was shown as the daughter of Kedarnath Upadhyay was also produced in the said proceeding. ;