SUBODH CHANDRA CHATTERJEE Vs. ASISH DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 5th October, 2004 and 8th October, 2004 respectively passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sealdah, Fast Track Court III in Title Appeal No.10 of 2001 reversing the judgment and decree dated 22nd December, 2000 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Additional Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No.72 of 1991. Appellant's / plaintiff's case, in short, is that he was owner of the suit building and that respondent / defendant occupied the suit room as a licensee under him without payment of license fee. As plaintiff reasonably required the suit room, he revoked the license of the defendant by sending a registered notice dated 23.06.1986 asking him to deliver 'khas' possession on 06.07.1986. The defendant refused to accept that notice and did not also vacate the suit room. Hence was the suit for eviction of licensee. It was further case of the appellant / plaintiff that the defendant illegally fixed up one door and accordingly the plaintiff prayed for a decree for damages and other reliefs.

(2.) The respondent/ defendant contested the said by filing written statement denying material allegations of the plaintiff and contending inter alia that he was a tenant in the suit room since December, 1974 at a rental of Rs.100/- per month together with electricity charges of Rs.10/- per month which has since been raised to Rs.20/- per month. The present accommodation of the plaintiff was sufficient and that the defendant did not fix any door. Plaintiff collected rent from defendant without issuing rent receipts and that later on defendant started to deposit rent in the office of Rent Controller and the defendant was in exclusive possession of the suit room all along and the suit was liable to be dismissed.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties learned Trial Court framed several issues including one issue namely whether defendant was a tenant or a licensee. Both sides adduced oral as well as documentary evidence in the Trial Court. On the basis of said evidence learned Trial Court came to a conclusion that defendant was a licensee under the plaintiff in the suit premises and accordingly he granted an ejectment decree but refused to grant any other relief. The defendant /tenant filed a Title Appeal being No.10 of 2001 in the First Appellate Court challenging said judgment and decree of eviction. Plaintiff also filed a cross appeal for refusal of damage / mesne profits by the Trial Court. Learned First Appellate Court allowed the appeal filed by the defendant and dismissed the cross appeal filed by the plaintiff and accordingly reversed the judgment of eviction passed by the Trial Court.