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

2017 Supreme(Cal) 48

JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, ISHAN CHANDRA DAS
Dhruba Kanrar – Appellant
Versus
Subrata Dhara – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Anirban Mitra, Mr. Kartick Chandra Kapali and Mr. Prasenjit Saha.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.

1. Let the certified copy of the judgment and decree, filed by the learned advocate appearing for the appellant be kept with the record.

2. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14th September, 2016 passed by the learned District Judge, Howrah, in Title Appeal No. 133 of 2015 affirming the judgment and decree dated 29th July, 2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge, 3rd Court at Howrah, in Title Suit No. 191 of 2012 at the instance of the defendant/ appellant.

3. Let us now consider as to whether any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal for which the appeal is required to be admitted for hearing under the provision of Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4. Here is the case where we find that an eviction suit was filed by the plaintiffs/ respondents against the defendant/appellant by treating him as licensee and on revocation of his licence.

5. It is alleged by the plaintiffs that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs became the owner of the suit property by way of purchase from the erstwhile owner thereof. It is alleged that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs inducted the













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