RINA DEY Vs. S. JAGANNATH RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 29th January, 2015 passed by learned District Judge at Howrah in Title Appeal No. 37 of 2014 reversing the judgment and decree passed on 10.02.2014 by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 6th Court, Howrah in Title Suit No. 92 of 2011, inter alia, on the grounds that the Court below erred in reversing the judgment and decree of the Trial Court by remanding the suit to Trial Court for decision afresh on the basis of materials already on record when materials on record were sufficient to arrive at a decision of its own in terms of Order 41 Rule 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Court of Appeal below has committed a substantial error of law in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Judge when non framing issue as to whether the defendant was irrevocable licensee will not be fatal when parties knew the real issue involved in the case and as such the order of remand is bad in law; particularly, when parties have understood their case and for the purpose of proving and contesting defence of irrevocable license had adduced evidence, therefore, the findings of the Appellate Court with regard to acceptance of defence case of irrevocable license are totally perverse and is liable to be set aside.

(2.) Factual Matrix leading to this Second Appeal is that the plaintiff instituted a suit for eviction of the defendant as the licensee to the suit premises. The plaintiff became the owner of 'A' schedule suit property by virtue of a registered deed of sale executed by Sri Ajay Kr. Bag and Smt. Sangita Bag dated 29.9.2008 and the plaintiff mutated her name in LRROR recorded in the new Khatian No. 6064 and she raised pucca double storied building on the purchased land and started to reside thereat with her family since 28th February, 2010.

(3.) The plaintiff's further case is that the defendant a colleague of her husband and an employee of South Eastern Railways posted in Grade-I (CNW), in the office of Divisional Mechanical Engineer, Santragachi Loco was inducted as a licensee in respect of the first floor of the suit premises on his approach made sometime in the month of July 2010 and on his representation that he would soon be allotted his service quarter and would shift over there and as such the defendant was allowed to remain in permissive occupation in respect of the entire first floor comprising two rooms, kitchen, veranda, bath and privy as well as one room on the second floor without any license fee.