Back
I. P. MUKERJI, ANIRUDDHA ROY
Jyoti Biswas – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar Ghosh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical background of tenancy and ownership. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. arguments against eviction based on tenancy rights. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 28 , 29) |
| 3. counterarguments related to statutory tenant rights. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 4. considerations on the validity of notices and abatement effects. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 5. decision requiring detailed trial and evidence. (Para 65 , 66 , 67 , 69) |
JUDGMENT
aniruddha Roy, J. - This cluster of appeals arose from a common judgment and order dated august 16, 2018 passed in Execution Case No. 146 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the occupiers of an immovable property were directed to be dispossessed. The said cluster of appeals involve same and common question of law for consideration before this appellate Court and hence, by consent of the parties, the appeals are taken up together, heard and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
The appeal:
2. The appellants are occupiers of various portions of premises no. 2 Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata-700013 previously known as Chowringhee Road (for short, the suit property) and are the obstructionists resisting an eviction decree dated May 03
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
