CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J
Falguni Sadhukhan – Appellant
Versus
Tarun Kumar Sadhukhan – Respondent
Mr. Dipankar Aditya Mr. Uttiya Roy Ms. Aishwarya Priya Raha …for the petitioner Mr. Amitabha Ghosh …for the opposite party This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the appellant in Title Appeal No. 6 of 2015 and is directed against order no. 6 dated June 24, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Serampore, Hooghly in Title Appeal No. 6 of 2015. By the order impugned the learned judge of the first appellate court directed the petitioner herein to pay occupation charges at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per month with effect from the date of the judgement and decree passed by the learned trial judge as a condition for grant of stay of all further proceedings of the title execution case.
Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the suit property is a tile-shed shop-room and is in a dilapidated condition and the market rate of rent of such property cannot be Rs.
3,000/- per month.
Learned advocate appearing for the opposite party, however, submits that the shop-room is measuring about more than 150 square feet and the petitioner is exploiting the same for commercial purpose and the occupation charge fixed
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.