SUDIP SINGHA ROY Vs. CHHAYARANI SINGHA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant second miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated May 26, 2011 passed by the Additional District Judge (Special Court), District-Hooghly in Title Appeal No. 146 of 2008 thereby affirming the order no. 104 dated September 22, 2008 passed by the Additional Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Chandernagore, District-Hooghly in Miscellaneous Case No. 05 of 2007 arising out of Title Execution Case No. 26 of 1998.

(2.) The respondent no. 1 filed a suit in the Additional Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandernagore, District-Hooghly being Title Suit No. 170 of 1997 for eviction of the respondent no.2 from the suit property alleging that her husband Rabindra Nath Singha Roy was the owner of the suit property and he bequeathed it to her by a registered deed of gift, the respondent no. 2 was a licensee under her husband without license fees and after his death she permitted the respondent no. 2 to stay in the suit property on the same terms and conditions but on April 15, 1995 such license was revoked and the respondent no. 2 was asked to quit and vacate the suit property which she refused, hence the suit. The respondent no. 2 contested the said suit. She claimed that she is the legally married wife of the said Rabindra Nath Singha Roy and in their wedlock the appellant was born. She challenged the validity and legality of the said deed of gift on the grounds that it was obtained by practising fraud, misrepresentation, coercion and it was never executed by the said Rabindra Nath Singha Roy.

(3.) The said suit was decreed on July 30, 1998 with the findings that the respondent no. 1 has failed to prove her marriage with the said Rabindra Nath Singha Roy and also the birth of the appellant in the said wedlock. One specific issue being issue no. 5 whether the plaintiff has any right, title and interest in respect of the suit property was framed in the said suit. The said issue was answered in favour of the respondent no. 1 holding that execution of said deed of gift was duly proved and the same was acted upon as the respondent no. 1 on the basis of said deed of gift, has recorded her name in the record of rights of the suit property.