Calcutta High Court
Tarun Kumar Ghose & Ors vs The Credit Union Co-Operative ... on 20 May, 2016
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
ORDER SHEET
GA 1540 of 2016
EC 346 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
TARUN KUMAR GHOSE & ORS.
Versus
THE CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE ENTERPRISE LTD.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON
Date : 20th May, 2016.
Appearance:
Mr. S.N. Mitra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. A. Mukherjee, Adv.
The Court : This is an application at the instance of a third party before the executing Court for adjudication of right, title and interest in respect of a shop room on the ground floor at premises no.2/1, Ho-Chi-Minh Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016. Admittedly, the lessor was successful in CS No.771 of 1981 filed against the judgment debtor. Two intervening applications were taken out before the executing Court for the similar and identical reliefs and those have been decided against those applicants as 2 they were found to be a sub-lessee and, therefore, the decree passed against the lessee binds them.
In the instant application, the petitioners claim the tenancy right on devolution. According to the petitioner, one Rahamatullah was inducted by the original owner of the premises namely Durgabati Ghosh in respect of a shop room being North-West go-down at premises no.2/1, Ho-Chi-Minh Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016 at a monthly rent of Rs.45/- according to English calendar. The present applicants are the widow and the daughter of the said Rahamatullah and claimed that such tenancy right devolved upon them by operation of law. The person inducted by an owner who happened to be the lessor, such person, in my opinion, should not be evicted on the strength of a decree passed against the lessee.
Mr. Mitra, learned Senior Advocate raises a serious objection on the genuinity and authenticity of the rent receipts annexed to the instant application. According to him, if the entire premises was demised unto the lessee much before the date on which those rent receipts are alleged to have been issued, it raises a presumption over the genuinity of the said documents. This Court had an occasion to see the original rent receipts, the photocopies thereof have been annexed to this application. On a bare look to those original documents, this Court feels that it cannot be said at this stage that those documents are in-genuine and/or manufactured for the purpose of this application. It 3 requires a full-fledged trial. This Court, therefore, finds that prima facie case has been made out for interim protection. This Court, therefore, restrains the Receiver from taking possession of the portion in occupation of the petitioner being a shop room on the ground floor at the said premises for a period of ten weeks from date or until further order whichever is earlier. The decree holder is permitted to file affidavit-in-opposition to this application within one week after the reopening of this Court following summer vacation; reply thereto, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter.
The matter will appear under the heading 'For Orders' in the supplementary list two weeks after the reopening of this Court following summer vacation.
It goes without saying that any observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and for the purpose of an interim protection and shall not have any impact at the time of final disposal of this application.
(HARISH TANDON, J.) sp2.