HARISH CHANDRA JAISWAL Vs. RAM CHANDRA SHAW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant nos. 1 and 2 have filed the present application being GA No. 3 of 2023 praying for rejection of plaint. The defendant nos. 1 and 2 have contended that the suit filed by the plaintiff is commercial in nature and thus this Court is not having jurisdiction to try the suit. The defendant nos. 1 and 2 says that initially the plaintiff has let out one shop room to M/s. Prakash Brothers being represented by two partners, namely, Laxmi Prasad Gupta and Om Prakash Gupta by entering into an agreement. The said firm defaulted in paying rent and accordingly the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiff and the defendant nos. 3, 4 and 5 have filed the suit before the City Civil Court at Calcutta being Ejectment Suit No. 476 of 1987 which was subsequently renumbered as the Ejectment Suit No. 408 of 2002. On 7/4/2008, the Learned 4th Bench of City Civil Court at Calcutta passed decree in favour of the plaintiff and subsequently in an execution case through the bailiff of the Court, the possession was handed over to the plaintiff on 26/10/2009 by the said firm.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the defendant nos. 1 and 2 submits that it is the admitted case of the plaintiff that on 9/6/2019, the plaintiff came to know that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 have occupied the suit premises and the suit premises is a shop room. He submits that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 are in occupation of the suit shop room in terms of the earlier agreement entered between the plaintiff and M/s. Prakash Brothers.

(3.) Mr. Meghnad Dutta, Learned Advocate representing the defendant nos. 1 and 2 submitted that, it is established that the dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant nos. 1 and 2 is commercial in nature and thus this Court is not having jurisdiction to try the suit.