Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Ajoy Pradhan vs Smt. Ramala Chakraborty on 24 March, 2017

Author: Ashis Kumar Chakraborty

Bench: Ashis Kumar Chakraborty

                                                               1


   (138)
24.03.2017
  (p.j.)


                              IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                    APPELLATE SIDE



                                   SA 449 of 2016
                                         +
                                   CAN 9663 of 2016

                                   Ajoy Pradhan
                                         -versus-
                                  Smt. Ramala Chakraborty

                    Mr. Hiranmoy Bhattacharya
                    Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee
                    Mr. Sounak Bhattachaya
                                        ... for the appellant

                    Mr. Malay Kumar Das
                    Mr. D. Raha
                    Mr. Pritam Mukherjee           ... for the respondent

Re : CAN 9663 of 2016 (stay).

This application has been filed praying for stay of all further proceedings of Ejectment Execution Case No. 4 of 2014 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4th Court at Alipore. Admittedly, the second appeal, which has been admitted by the Division Bench of this Court, arises out of the eviction decree passed by the learned first appellate Court below against the appellant petitioner. The suit property comprises the entire ground floor of the building situated at 2 premises No. 1/1/4D, Beni Nandan Street, Bhawanipur located, in the prime location in the city of Kolkata.

Considering the location of the suit property and other advantages, there shall be an interim order directing stay of the aforementioned execution proceeding subject to the petitioner paying occupation charges, at the rate of Rs. 7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand only) per month to the respondent landlord from the month of August, 2016 till the disposal of the appeal.

Mr. Hiranmoy Bhattacharya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant petitioner submitted that till the month of February, 2017 the appellant petitioner has deposited the occupation charges at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) as directed by the learned first appellate Court below. So far as the differential amount of arrear occupation charges from the month of August, 2016 till the month of February, 2017 and the occupation charges for the month of March, 2017 the petitioner shall pay the amount of Rs. 42,000/- (Rupees Forty-two Thousand only) to the respondent landlord by way of three monthly instalments of Rs. 14,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Thousand only) each. The first of such instalment shall be paid within April 7, 2017 and the balance instalments will be paid on the 7th day of each succeeding month.

In addition to the above arrear occupation charges, from the month of April, 2017 the petitioner shall continue to pay the current monthly occupation charges at the rate of Rs. 7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand only) per month to the respondent landlord by the 7th day of each succeeding month.

Subject to the payment of the monthly instalments of arrear occupation charges and the current monthly occupation charges from the month of April, 2017 within the time period mentioned above, all further proceedings in Title Execution Case No. 4 of 2014 pending before the 3 learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4th Court at Alipore shall remain stayed till the disposal of the second appeal.

It is, however, made clear that in the event of any default on the part of the petitioner to deposit any instalment of the arrear occupation charges or the current monthly occupation charges within the time frame mentioned above, the interim order of stay of the execution proceeding shall stand automatically vacated, without any further reference to this Court.

Since Mr. Malay Kumar Das, learned counsel is already appearing for the sole respondent, service of notice of appeal on the respondent is dispensed with.

The appeal shall be deemed to be ready as regards service of notice of appeal. As submitted by Mr. Malay Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, the respondent shall deposit the special messenger's cost for bringing the lower Courts' records in the department within March 30, 2017.

If the respondent deposits the special messenger's cost, the department shall bring the lower Courts' records through special messenger.

In default, the lower Courts' records be brought in usual manner. After arrival of lower Courts' records, the office is further directed to examine the lower Courts' records and, if found complete, issue notice of arrival of lower Courts' records on the learned advocate for the respondent within two weeks.

The respondent is directed to prepare and file requisite number of paper books, printed, typewritten or cyclostyled, as the case may be, within four weeks from the date of service of notice of arrival of lower Courts' records on the learned advocate for the respondent.

Liberty to mention the appeal as and when the appeal becomes ready for hearing before the appropriate Bench having determination, however, subject to the convenience of the Court. 4

With the above directions, CAN 9663 of 2016 stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Certified website copies of the order, if applied for, be urgently made available to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)