CENTRAL MODEL SCHOOL Vs. GOJER BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is at the instance of a plaintiff in a suit for declaration and injunction and is directed against order dated December 20, 2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division Sealdah in Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 1999 thereby setting aside order No. 27 dated April 20, 1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No. 502 of 1997.

(2.) The present petitioner filed a suit being Title Suit No. 502 of 1997 in the 2nd Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Sealdah for declaration that the plaintiff is a tenant in respect of the ground floor of the building in the suit property mentioned in Schedule A of the plaint and has acquired right, title and interest over and in respect of the vacant plot of land by long user adversely to the real owner as described in Schedule- B thereto and for permanent injunction restraining the opposite parties from interfering in any way with the plaintiff's occupation and possession in respect of suit property mentioned in Schedules A and B.

(3.) According to the petitioners they took a tenancy in the name of defendant No. 2, since deceased, for the use and occupation of the plaintiff for housing and locating the plaintiff's school and the said school was running in the said tenanted property. It is further stated in the plaint that the petitioner had been using the building portion for importing education to the students and the land portion being Schedule B of the plaint was being used as play ground for holding physical education classes of its students as well as for other recreational activities. During the hours when the school was closed, the plaintiff used the said plot as a parking space for parking its school vehicles. The further case of the plaintiffs as stated in the paragraph 5 of the plaint is that the opposite party No. 1 did not possess and occupy the said plot of land from 1956 and the petitioner had therefore acquired and asserted "tenancy right" over and in respect of the suit premises to the exclusion of all others including defendant No. 1 and asserted right, title and interest against the rightful owner by virtue of such adverse possession.