Debi Prosad Dey, J. - (1.) The plaintiff/petitioner has filed this review petition being aggrieved by the decision delivered by this Division Bench in first appeal no. 18 of 2011.
(2.) The plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit with the following prayer: " For a decree directing the defendant no.1 to execute and register the said Lease dated 24th day of December, 1977 in respect of the suit property in terms of the Agreement dated 24th day of November, 1977 as modified by the supplementary Agreement dated 26th day of December, 1977 within a specified date (Annexures 'A and 'B' of the plaint) and in case the deft no.1 fails to execute and register the said lease then to have the same executed and registered by the registrar or by other competent officer of the Court after modification consequent on the death of the original owner of the suit property Smt. Kamal Kumari Law with whom the agreement for lease took place, according to the provisions of Order 21 rule 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 as amended by C. P. C. Amendment Act of 1976. Decree for declaration that the Lease deed dated 19th November, 1979 in respect of premises no. 43, Kailash Bose Street, Calcutta, executed and registered by Sekhar Chandra Law, Executor to the Estate of Smt. Kamal Kumari Law(deceased) the defendant/opposite party no.1 in favour of Mahesh Properties Private Limited, the defendant/opposite party No.2 is void, illegal, in-operative and not binding upon the petitioner. A permanent injunction restraining the defendants from encroaching upon the suit property and from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession thereof. Mandatory injunction, demolishing any forcible and illegal constructions made by the defendants or their men, agents etc. as the suit premises and inside it, if the defendants succeeds in making such constructions in the suit premises during the pendency of the suit and a Mandatory Decree to that effect, at the cost of the defendants or in default, at the costs of the plaintiff to be recovered from the defendants. Injunction upon the defendant no.2 restraining it from proceeding with the Money suit No. 512/1982 of the City Civil Court at Calcutta or obtaining a Decree for the same in favour of defendant no.2 till the disposal of the suit. Leave under order 11 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Prcedure. Receiver. Injunction Costs Further or other reliefs to which the plaintiff may be entitled to in law and in equity.
(3.) The suit was registered as title suit no. 2339 of 1982 and was disposed of by learned Judge, 3rd Bench, City Civil Court holding inter-alia that the suit is barred by law of limitation, that the plaintiff has not paid proper Court fees in respect of his claim to the properties described in the schedule of the plaint, that the schedule given in the plaint is vague and indefinite and that the plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief in terms of his claim in view of execution of a registered deed of lease by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant no.2.;