LAWS(CAL)-2003-10-4

RAMKRISHNA MISSION Vs. PARIMAL BIKASH BISWAS

Decided On October 31, 2003
RAMKRISHNA MISSION Appellant
V/S
PARIMAL BIKASH BISWAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parimal Bikash Biswas (hereinafter referred to as PBB for brevity) filed Title Suit No.225 of 1985 before the First Court of Munsif at Howrah on 22.8.1985 praying for declaration that he is a tenant in respect of a flat on holding No. 212(A) G.T. Road, Belur, P.S. Bally, District - Howrah (hereinafter referred to as the suit premises), for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing and/or interfering with the possession of the plaintiff in the suit property and for other reliefs.

(2.) The specific case of PBB is that he was appointed as lecturer in Ramkrishna Mission Sarada Pith on 1st August, 1959. At the time of his initial appointment he was occupying another flat at 13/1, Temple Road as a monthly tenant under a private person on payment of rent of Rs.60A. Since there was no condition of service as regards allotment of any official quarter to PBB, he hired the suit flat as a monthly tenant under Ramkrishna Mission Sarada Pith on payment of rent of Rs.65/- and water charges of Rs. 5/- and the tenancy was started in October 1960, In March 1967 PBB was forced to sign a typed paper produced before him in which his declaration was taken to the effect that he is occupying the suit premises as a licensee and not as a tenant. PBB had no other alternative than to sign the said declaration at the instance of his employer and not on his freewill. But in spite of signing of the paper PBB went of occupying the said suit premises as a tenant on payment of usual monthly rent after enjoying all the rights, privileges and amenities as a tenant. On the question of superannuation from his service there was a dispute between the employer and PBB for which this Hon'ble Court was moved by PBB and thereby an order was obtained in his favour restraining his employer not to disturb his possession in respect of the suit premises But in spite of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court the employer threatened to oust PBB forcibly through his agents and accordingly finding no other alternative the suit was filed praying for the relief hereinabove mentioned.

(3.) The plaint was subsequently amended on 20th September, 1985 by way of adding the different office bearers of Ramkrishna Mission Sarada Pith as defendants in place of Ramkrishna Mission Sarada Pith. The defendants who were the office bearers of Ramkrishna Mission Sarada Pith (hereinafter referred to as RKM for brevity) contested the suit after filing a written statement on 5th July, 1988 denying all the material allegations made in the plaint.