SWAPAN KUMAR DEY Vs. SMT. ARATI NANDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against the judgment and order dated June 11, 2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 7th Fast Track Court, Alipore in Misc. Appeal No. 355 of 2006 thereby dismissing the said misc. appeal on contest.

(2.) The appellant is the petitioner herein. The plaintiff / respondent / opposite party instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 259 of 2004 before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Alipore praying for decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men and agents from creating any disturbance to the plaintiff in her peaceful enjoyment of the premises in suit and other permanent injunction. The plaintiff has contended that she is the owner of the premises in suit as described in the Schedule of the plaint and the appellant / petitioner herein was a tenant in respect of the premises in suit as described in the schedule of the plaint in the 2nd Floor Flat at 95/1, Ballygunge Place, under P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata - 700019. As per averment of the plaint, the plaintiff let out the premises in suit in July 1990 to the defendant, but, in fact, his mother and younger brother occupied the said premises in suit. The defendant installed electric meter in his tenanted premises in his own name.

(3.) In or about July 1998, the defendant permanently surrendered the premises in suit and his mother and younger brother were shifted to his own house situated at 87, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700017. But at the time of leaving of the suit premises for ever, he requested the plaintiff and her husband to allow him to keep a few scattered articles with promise to take back those articles within a month. The parties to the suit had a good relationship and as such, the plaintiff allowed the defendant to keep some scattered articles with hope and trust that the defendant would take away the same within a month. The plaintiff kept the said premises in suit under lock and key since the time of departure of the defendant, his mother and the younger brother. After surrender of the said flat, the husband of the plaintiff took electric connection in his own name in the premises in suit from the same meter allotted to the defendant on surrender by the defendant as well as upon withdrawal of the security deposit by the defendant. Subsequently, the defendant did not remove his scattered articles and he tried to create multifarious troubles to the plaintiff posing threat to the plaintiff to encroach the premises in suit and for that reason, the plaintiff filed the suit for the reliefs already stated.