LAWS(CAL)-1981-7-2

ANADI NATH CHAKRABORTY Vs. DUKHIRAM GHOSE

Decided On July 14, 1981
ANADI NATH CHAKRABORTY Appellant
V/S
DUKHIRAM GHOSE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has alleged that the three disputed plots belonged to pro forma defendant No. 2 who retained the same under the provisions of the West Bengal Acquisition Act. He paid licence fee of Rs. 300/- and on the 15th Sravan, 1375 B. S., took a licence of that property for that year from Pro forma defendant No. 2. The defendant No. 1 came to catch fish from that pond, but he put up obstruction. Due to such threat, the plaintiff has instituted the present suit for a permanent injunction on declaration that he is a licensee regarding that property in question under pro forma defendant No. 2.

(2.) Defendant No. 1 has filed a written statement denying the plaintiffs allegations. His defence is that out of the big plot No. 518, he took settlement of two bighas on the north east from pro forma defendant No. 2. He is in possession of that property. One Nitya Gopal Biswas took settlement of plot No. 293 and the area of the land taken settlement of by the latter from pro forma defendant No. 2 is 2.72 acres. He is a bargadar of that land under Nitya Gopal.

(3.) The learned Munsif believed the plaintiff's version and decreed the suit. The defendant No. 1 filed an appeal. The appellate court affirmed the decision of the learned Munsif and held that the case of the plaintiffs right in the disputed property as a licensee was true. The defendant No. 1 had no interest in two bighas of land out of the disputed plot No. 518. Nitya Gopal's case of settlement of 2.72 acres of land was not true. The appeal was dismissed. Hence this appeal on behalf of the defendant No, 1.