The court established that unauthorized occupants remain liable for payment of occupational charges, equated to market rents, even amidst ongoing litigation regarding property rights.

Order

Today is fixed for passing the Order of I.A. No.13 of 2023. Plaintiff and defendant nos. 2 to 6 file their respective haziras.

Now, the instant record is taken up for passing order in respect of the aforesaid I.A.

I.A. No. 13 of 2023

1. The instant application has been filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying for reliefs as stated therein.

2. Affidavit of opposition to the aforesaid application has been filed and reply to that has also been filed.

3. The contention of the plaintiff/petitioner herein has fully been germinated from the facts which have more-fully been delineated in the plaint as well as in the instant application. Epitome of such fact is as follows:

4. One Jitendra Nath Ghosh, the original owner of the property in question, by virtue of a deed dated 15^th December, 1973 leased out the suit property to Kumar Industries for a period of 20 years and by efflux of time said deed expired on 30th November, 1993. Mr. Jitendra Nath Ghosh died on 15th September, 1995 leaving behind his seven sons. In the meantime, the West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 2001 was promulgated and came into effect on and from 1^st March, 2003 whereby Thika Tenancies were deemed to have vested with the State with retrospective effect from 18^th January, 1982. The provisions of the said Act of 2001 mandates that Thika Tenancy and rights there under could be decided by a Thika Controller and Section 4 , 5 and 27 of the said Act of 2001 are relevant in the present proceeding. On April 9, 2003 i.e. immediately after the said Act of 2001 was brought into effect, the properties of Kumar Industries claimed to be Thika Tenants and deposited rent with respect to the property in favour of the State of West Bengal. Then, on 10^th September, 2007 the plaintiff herein purchased the said suit property from the absolute owners of the said premises being seven sons of Jitendra Nath Ghosh. On 27^th January, 2010 an order passed by the Learned Controller holding that the said Kumar Industries qualified as Thika Tenants under the said Act of 2001 and being aggrieved by this Order plaintiff preferred an application before the State Govt. under Section 13 of the Act of 2001 and the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal in its Department of Land and Land Revenue requested the Kolkata Thika Controller to dispose of the application filed by hearing the parties and the said application was disposed of on August 1, 2012 against the plaintiff and in favour of the Kumar Industries. Then the plaintiff again filed an application before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal and the Ld. Tribunal rejected the said appeal on 18th November, 2013. The plaintiff challenged the said order before the Hon‟ble High Court at Calcutta and the said Hon‟ble High Court set aside the order of WBLRTT on March 10, 2014. Thereafter, the matter was reached before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court and the Hon‟ble Apex Court finally decided the matter on 27^th July, 2022 declaring that the defendants were not Thika tenants within the meaning of the Act of 1981 giving reasons to that effect.

5. In view of the aforesaid, the plaintiff chose to file the instant suit along with the interlocutory applications before this Court praying for recovery of possession and the mesne profit along with other ancillary relief(s) thereto. In respect of the said application, this Court was pleased to grant an ad interim order in favour of the petitioner, vide the Order dated 01.04.2023.

6. The contention of the petitioner:

The respondents are trespassers. T