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 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs Santanu Mullick on 2 July, 2019

Author: Soumen Sen

Bench: Soumen Sen, Ravi Krishan Kapur

ORDER
                                     GA 653/2019
                                         WITH
                                    APD 120/2015
                          IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                           Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                                   ORIGINAL SIDE


                    HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.
                                   Versus
                      SANTANU MULLICK, EXECUTOR & ORS.


   BEFORE:
   The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
   The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR
   Date : 2nd July, 2019.
                                                                       Appearance:
                                                       Mr. A. K. Awasthi, Advocate
                                                  ...for the applicant/respondent.

Mr. Malay Kr. Ghosh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Chanchal Kr. Dutt, Advocate ...for the appellant.

One of the decree-holders/respondents has taken out an application during the pendency of the appeal for an order of injunction restraining the appellant from taking any step or further step or proceeding any further with Misc. Case No. 29 of 2010 pending before the Thika Controller, Kolkata in respect of Premises No. 3D, Camac Street, Kolkata - 700017 till the disposal of the appeal. It appears that the applicant along with other plaintiffs filed a suit for recovery of possession of the premises in question. In the suit, one of the issues framed by the Learned Single Judge is whether the defendant is a thika tenant in respect of the suit property under the provisions of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981. This issue was decided against the appellant. The appellant has preferred an appeal. In the appeal, the appellant has contended that the civil court has no jurisdiction in respect of the tenancy of the appellant. However, having regard to the fact that a civil court has decided the issue in favour of the applicant and against the appellant, we restrain the appellant from proceeding with Misc. Case No. 29 of 2010 before the Thika Controller, Kolkata till the disposal of the appeal.

GA No. 653 of 2019 stands disposed of.

Since no affidavit in opposition is called for, the allegations are deemed to have been denied and disputed. However, there will be no order as to costs.

(SOUMEN SEN, J.) (RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR, J.) S. Kumar