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

2005 Supreme(Cal) 471

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, RAJENDRA NATH SINHA
SUKUMAR SAHA – Appellant
Versus
SHYAMAL KUMAR SAHA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BIDYUT BANERJI, KOUSHIK ROY, RAMESHWAR BHATTACHARYA

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

( 1 ) THIS first appeal is at the instance of the defendant No. 1 in a suit for eviction and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th September, 1993, passed by the learned Judge, 9th Bench, city Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 2136 of 1982 thereby passing a decree for recovery of possession and mesne porfit at the rate of Re. 1 per day in favour of the plaintiff till the recovery of possession.

( 2 ) THE respondent No. 1 filed the aforesaid suit being Title Suit No. 2138 of 1982 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta thereby praying for recovery of possession of the suit property from the appellant herein and the case made out by the respondent No. 1 may be epitomised thus: (a) The suit property being premises No. 3/1/1c, Nanda Ram Sen Street belonged to the defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and one Aloke Ranjan Saha and in the year 1943, they let out the entire ground floor consisting of two rooms, kitchen, bathroom and privy with a porch and courtyard to one anil Kumar Saha at a rental of Rs. 28/- per month and such amount was subsequently increased to Rs. 35/- per month according to Bengali calendar. (b) In or about 1945, the said Anil Kumar



















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