Subodh Kumar Samanta vs Secretary, W. B. S. E. D. C. L.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Cal) 116

SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, UDAY KUMAR
Subodh Kumar Samanta – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, W. B. S. E. D. C. L. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Probal Mukherjee, Ld. Sr. Adv., Mr. Arun Shaw
For the Respondents: Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Mr. Puspal Chakraborty, Mr. Prisanka Ganguly

JUDGMENT :

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.

1. The plaintiff in an eviction suit has filed the present appeal against the dismissal of the said suit on contest.

2. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the learned Trial Judge proceeded on an erroneous premise in holding that the plaintiff has failed to proof that the he is the lessor of the suit property in respect of the defendants and also that the suit was bad for non-joinder of one Sanat Kumar Samanta, who used to take rent from the defendants.

3. Learned senior counsel argues that the appellant has proved that he was a co-owner in respect of the suit property along with one Laxmi Narayan Samanta by virtue of a registered deed of sale dated March 12, 1963, which was marked as Exhibit-1 in the suit.

4. Thereafter, by virtue of a final decree passed in a partition suit, bearing Title Suit No.164 of 2008, on the basis of a Solenama, the plaintiff became the exclusive owner of the suit premises which had been let out to the respondents. The owner, having paramount title, is entitled to get eviction against an occupant/lessee, it is argued.

5. Learned senior counsel cites Dadan Bai wd/o Bhagchand Sindhi v. Arjundas,