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

1986 Supreme(Cal) 12

M.N.RAO, SUKUMAR CHAKRAVARTY
JADUNATH BASAK – Appellant
Versus
MRITUNJOY SETT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.N.MUKHERJEE, PROBODH R.DAS

CHAKRAVARTY, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by Shri S. N. Banerjee, the learned Judge, 13th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, in Title Suit No. 1298 of 1976.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit for a declaration that the defendant No. 1 (Jadunath Basak) had no right or authority to run a factory in the suit premises and for permanent and mandatory injunction.

( 3 ) IT was the case of the plaintiff (Mritunjoy Sett) that he was one of the co-owners of the suit premises No. 43f, Nilmohi Mitra Street, Calcutta, having 3/4th share therein and that defendant No. 2 Kamala Sett, the other co-owner, had th share. The entire first floor of the said premises was in occupation of the plaintiff and the garret at the top was in occupation of the near relation of the plaintiff. The defendant No. 1 was inducted as a tenant in a portion of the ground floor by the defendant No. 2 who occupied the remaining portion of the ground floor. The defendant No. 1 had been running the business of metal industries with two power driven machine in the tenanted room without the consent of the plaintiff and without any authority from the Corporation of Calcutt












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