Back
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Gupta Auto Agency – Appellant
Versus
Amiya Kumar Gooptu, since deceased, Rep. By Aloka Gooptu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
1. Being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 8th August, 2003 passed by learned Judge, 8th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Appeal no. 12 of 2003, present Second Appeal has been preferred. By the impugned judgment and decree the court below affirmed the decree dated 19th August, 2002 passed by learned Judge, 6th Bench Presidency Small Causes Court Calcutta in Ejectment suit no. 1042 of 2000.
2. The respondent herein as plaintiff filed aforesaid Ejectment suit no. 1042 of 2000 against defendant/Appellant herein for recovery of khas possession. The defendant is a registered partnership firm and a monthly tenant under the plaintiffs in respect of the suit premises. Originally a tenancy agreement was entered in between the plaintiff/landlord and Gupta Auto Agency of which Omprakash Gupta was the sole proprietor. Thereafter, it has been converted into a partnership firm by dint of partnership deed dated 31st August, 1984 and the name of the partners are Omprakash Gupta, Sohan Lal Gupta, Rajendra Kumar Gupta, and Ajay Gupta.
3. In the plaint and the amended plaint it is alleged that the defendant is guilty of acts of waste and damages
The plaintiff must prove subletting by producing proper evidence, and the High Court should not interfere with findings of fact unless they are contrary to the evidence on record.
A tenant does not sublet the premises merely by executing a Power of Attorney in favor of a partner of the firm.
A tenant's unauthorized use of premises and subletting without landlord consent constitutes a breach of tenancy, justifying eviction.
Revisional courts cannot re-appreciate evidence. Once a landlord proves a third party is in exclusive possession, the burden shifts to the tenant to prove the arrangement is a genuine partnership and....
The burden of proof to establish subtenancy is on the landlord, and the court may affirm an eviction decree if the landlord successfully demonstrates the creation of subtenancy.
The burden of proof for unlawful subletting shifts to the tenant once the landlord establishes exclusive possession by a third party.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the burden of proving unlawful sub-letting rests with the landlord and clarified the distinction between revisional and appellate jurisdiction, emphasizing that High....
Concurrent findings of fact, even if erroneous, cannot be disturbed in a second appeal. Perversity in findings of fact requires a complete misreading of evidence or should be based only on conjecture....
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
