Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

1455/2012 on 20 June, 2012

Author: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee

Bench: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee

                                                                  1

/L. 64.
une 20, 2012.
    MNS.


                                S. A. No. 109 of 2012


                Mr. Shyama Prasanna Roychowdhury,
                Mr. A. K. Bhattacharya,
                Mrs. S. Gupta(Roy),
                Mr. Biswarup Biswas

                           ...for the appellant.


                Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee,
                Mr. Rahul Karmakar,
                Mr. Ardhendu Nag

                                ...for the respondent.

This appeal will be heard on the following substantial questions of law :

1) Whether the learned judge in the lower appellate court substantially erred in law in reversing the decision of the learned trial judge on the points noticed by the learned trial judge?

2) Whether the learned judge in the lower appellate court substantially erred in law in reversing the decision of the learned trial judge on the point of service of notice upon the defendant-appellant?

3) Whether the learned judge in the lower appellate court substantially erred in law in reversing the findings of the learned trial judge on the ground of default without following the settled law that in a case where the defendant was not a defaulter it was not obligatory on the part of the tenant to take out an application under Sub-section 1 of Section 7 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997?

Call for the records.

Issue usual notices.

Re : C. A. N. 1455 of 2012(stay application) Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, learned advocate appears and accepts notice of this application for stay on behalf of the respondent. He informs that his junior Mr. Ardhendu Nag, learned advocate, has filed caveat bearing no. 4623 of 2011(S. R. Section) dated December 8, 2011.

The office is directed to incorporate the caveat with the file.

Let affidavit-in-opposition to the application for stay be filed by one week; reply thereto, if any, by one week thereafter.

Put up the application for stay before the appropriate bench, having determination, subject, however, to the convenience of the Hon'ble Judge after two weeks.

There shall be stay of all further proceedings in Ejectment Execution Case No. 180 of 2011 pending before the learned Judge, Fifth Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court, Calcutta, during the pendency of this application for stay.

(Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.) (Murari Prasad Shrivastava, J.)