SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1982 Supreme(Cal) 125

M.M.DUTT
PARIMAL MITRA – Appellant
Versus
PARESH CHANDRA HAZRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ALOK GHOSH, AMAL CHAKRABORTY, RANJIT KUMAR BANERJEE, Sudhis Das Gupta

M. M. DUTT, J.


( 1 ) THIS application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the defendants nos. 1 and 3 to 5, and it is directed against order no. 51 dated July 29, 1981 of the learned Judge, 5th bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Suit No. 2317 of 1958 holding that the said court has jurisdiction to try the suit instituted by the plaintiff opposite party.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff's case in short is that he was at all material times and still is a tenant under the defendants nos. 1 and 3 to 5 of the entire building known as Atindra Dham and situate at Gopal Ballav Road, Sea Beach, Puri at a monthly rent of Rs. 300/- payable according to the English Calendar month. The defendants nos. 6 to 9 are the subtenants under the plaintiff. On august 31, 1977, the defendant no. 4, one of the landlords of the plaintiff, took him to the Hongkong House, Calcutta and he was compelled to sign some papers. Subsequently, the plaintiff came to know that he was made to execute a resolution and/or an agreement whereby he had purported to surrender his tenancy in respect of the disputed building in favour of the owners and landlords. Under that agreement, a sum or Rs. 16,













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top