PIJUSH KANTI DATTA Vs. MANGILAL GIDIA
LAWS(CAL)-1986-1-5
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on January 10,1986

PIJUSH KANTI DATTA Appellant
VERSUS
MANGILAL GIDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The plaintiff is a practising Barrister of this Court. His wife and his brother-in-law are stated to be the joint owners of the premises No. 4D, Lansdowne Road, Calcutta, where the plaintiff resides with his family in the first floor of the said premises. This suit has been instituted by the plaintiff on 9th August, 1985 for a decree for Rs. 30 lakhs, being the damages allegedly suffered by the plaintiff by reason of certain alleged defamatory words written by the defendant who is a tenant of the second floor of the said premises since 1st October, 1979.
(2.) The defendant entered appearance but did not file any written statement. This suit has appeared before me as an undefended suit on the basis of the Certificate issued by the Registrar, Original Side.
(3.) The case of the plaintiff briefly stated is as follows : The reservoir on the western side of the said premises is the only source of supply of water to the plaintiff and his family in the first floor and to the ground floor of the said premises also occupied by the plaintiff. On 2nd June, 1984 masons and labour were engaged by the owners of the said premises to repair the said reservoir, the same having developed cracks and breaches resulting into leakage of water on all sides of the said reservoir. On the same day i.e. 2-6-84 the defendant and the members of his family wrongfully, illegally, mala fide and out of motive actuated by malice prevented and/or resisted the repairs of the said reservoir as ascertained from the said owner, on, inter alia, the false, mala fide and malicious ground that it was really intended to make a forcible, wrongful, illegal and unauthorised construction on the said rear balcony Which the defendant untruly and mala fide claimed to be within his alleged tenancy. According to the plaintiff the tenancy of the said defendant was allegedly determined by a statutory notice dt. June 4, 1984 served upon the defendant. Subsequent to the aforesaid, the defendant on the same day i.e. 2-6-84 falsely, mala fide and maliciously made a complaint with the Lake Police Station, recorded in writing by the Deputy Officer and signed by the defendant being "G. D. E. No. 162 dt. June 2, 1984" falsely, mala fide, and maliciously alleging therein with express malice to his knowledge as follows :- "One Mr. M.L. Gidia of 4D, Lansdowne Place, 2nd floor, Calcutta-29, called at the P. S. and reported that he is the tenant of the said premises under Smt, Jyotsna Dutta. Today 2-6-84 morning at about 09.30 hrs. one Mr. P.K. Dutta husband of the lanc3ladv called at the informants place with two persons for pretext of Painting works. The informant requested him to defer the work for a few days as there were a few guests with some children there. But he refused and enforced to complete to paint the door. Then one carpenter enter from balcony side and he attempted to close the door by putting the lock on the door. The informant protested for the same. Then the carpenter left the place. At about 11-30 hrs. Mr. P.K. Dutta called the informant at down at the ground floor and threatened him to allow his men to put the lock, otherwise he will use the force. The informant requested him not to do any unlawful work. Then the informant left for his office work. At about 15.30 hrs. he got an information that Mr. Dutta entered his flat forcefully and beaten his son and his wife and also broken the balcony side door and damaged things. Again at about 16.30 hrs. he received a telephonic information from his residence, that the landlord disconnected his water line and electricity. The informant also apprehended that he will create trouble by using force and we feel dangerous to live there with old lady and small children. He wants to have it recorded for future reference referred to Court. Sd /- T. Bose Sd/- M. L. Gidia A. S. I. (Illegible)" It is a case of the plaintiff that "Mr. P.K. Dutta" or "Mr. Dutta", as used and expressed in the said complaint-police diary June 2, 1984, the defendant expressly referred to meant and caused to be meant and/or understood the plaintiff herein.;


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