PRAFULLA KUMAR SAHA Vs. RANJIT KUMAR SAHA
LAWS(CAL)-1997-9-33
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on September 05,1997

PRAFULLA KUMAR SAHA Appellant
VERSUS
RANJIT KUMAR SAHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.B.Sinha, J. - (1.) The defendant has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4.1.96 passed by Sri Gopal Banerjee, learned Judge, 8th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 211 of 1982.
(2.) The plaintiff, who is the respondent in this appeal had filed the aforementioned suit on the ground that the defendant had defaulted in payment of rent from Baisak 1384 B.S. as also on the ground of subletting to one Mantu Kundu. Before the learned trial Judge, the defendant, while purporting to deny the relationship of landlord and tenant stated thus: "In reply to para 1 it is denied that the Defendant is a tenant under the plaintiff. This defendant was inducted as a tenant by one Manindra Mohan Saha and the death of the said Manindra Mohan Saha his wife Thakurdasi Saha became the landlady who was taking rents from the defendant. After the death of said Thakurdasi Saha the plaintiff had been recovering rents as rent collector on behalf of the landlords. The plaintiff is not the owner of the suit premises. That the defendant was paying rents, by money order and the plaintiff was receiving the same. On 27.6.81 the defendant as usual tendered the monthly rent for Baisakh 1388 (B.S) by postal money order, but the plaintiff refused to accept the same. Thereafter the petitioner again tendered rent by postal money order on 11.8.81. This time also the plaintiff refused to accept the same. Hence, it is denied that the defendant failed and neglected to pay rents. This is in reply to para 2 of the plaint. On the basis of the aforementioned pleadings, the following issues were framed: "1. Is there any relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties? 2. Is the defendant defaulter ? 3. Has the defendant sublet the suit premises ? 4. Is the defendant guilty of causing act to waste and damage in the suit premises? 5. Has any valid notice to quit served upon the defendant ? 6. Is the plaintiff entitled to relief as claimed in the suit ? 7. To what relief or reliefs if any, is the plaintiff entitled ?"
(3.) The learned trial Judge on the basis of the materials on records held that the plaintiff has been able to prove his case on both counts.;


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