RAM KHILAN DAS Vs. RADHARANI DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for a declaration that the decree passed in Ejectment Suit No. 79 of 1958 between Radharani Dasi v. Augurbala Dasi was not binding upon the plaintiff nor executable against him and for permanent injunction, was dismissed by the learned Court below.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was as follows :-- The father of the plaintiff Late Chanchal Das was originally a tenant in respect of a shop room in the ground floor of premises No. 107A, Durga Charan Mitra Street, under the original owner Mohanlal Dey at a rental of Rs. 20/- per month and on his death in the year 1956 the plaintiff, who was only son inherited the tenancy of the shop room and had been carrying out coal business therein. The rent of the room was gradually increased up to Rs. 30/- per month with electric charges of Rs. 3/- per month. But in the year 1360 B. S. the entire suit premises with all the existing tenancies were leased out by Mohanlal Dey to defendant No. 3 Angurbala Dasi. On 20-9-1957 Mohanlal Dey transferred the entire suit premises by sale to the defendant No. 1 Radharani Dasi and defendant No. 2 Binapani Dasi along with the existing tenancies including the tenancy of the plaintiff. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 instituted an ejectment Suit No. 79 of 1958 in the City Civil Court against the defendant No. 3 and obtained a decree on 9-9-1963. The plaintiff challenged the decree as nullity and not binding against him. The right of the plaintiff was said to be protected under the law and he could not be evicted in execution of that decree.

(3.) Thus, ejectment decree was put into execution by Ejectment Execution Case No. 360 of 1966 and the plaintiff lawfully resisted the Court's bailiff on his independent right. The defendants Nos. 1 and 2 however, filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 C. P. Code against the plaintiff and other tenants. It was found by the Court that it was not possible to accept the plaintiff as a tenant under the original landlord Mohanlal Dey. Hence present suit.