Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Uday Kumar, Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, JJ
Amal Chandra Barai – Appellant
Versus
Ms. Aditi Barai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant transferred property leading to eviction dispute. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. need for injunction despite jurisdictional barriers. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. equitable principles must be observed regarding eviction. (Para 6 , 9 , 12) |
| 4. injunction granted reflecting equitable relief. (Para 11) |
| 5. further legal proceedings required for clarity. (Para 13 , 14 , 16 , 17) |
1. The plaintiff/appellant is the father of the defendant/respondent no. 1 as well as the proforma defendant/respondent no. 2. The appellant-father transferred his entire dwelling house in favour of his two daughters, the respondents herein. Subsequently, the respondent no. 2 transferred her share of the property in favour of the defendant/respondent no. 1, thus making the defendant/respondent no. 1 the exclusive owner of the entire dwelling house.
2. Thereafter, it is alleged by the appellant, the defendant/respondent no. 1 is trying to evict the appellant/father from the suit property.
3. By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge refused to pass ad interim injunction on the ground that the gift deed and particulars have not been furnished by the appellant, which itself, in our opinion, is not a good ground f
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
