BIMAL CHANDRA SARKAR Vs. DIPALI DUTTA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant civil order has been preferred assailing the order dtd. 18/4/2022 passed in connection with E.J no. 131 of 2004 wherein Ld. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bidhannagar has been pleased to refuse the prayer for local inspection by a Ld. Advocate under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short CPC).

(2.) Plaintiff/opposite party filed a suit for eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement, against the defendant/petitioner herein. Plaintiff/opposite party pleaded available accommodation to the plaintiff and his family members and also pleaded that there was no other alternative suitable accommodation. In course of that proceeding one local inspection was held at the instance of the plaintiff/opposite party, which ended in submission of final report. Subsequently, further construction was made in each floor of the subject premises by the plaintiff/opposite party. Thereafter, defendant/petitioner herein filed one application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC with a prayer for incorporation of the fact of 'subsequent construction' and also an application under Order 39 Rule 7 of the CPC with a prayer for further local inspection with regard to 'subsequent construction'. Ld. Trial Judge albeit allowed the amendment application but refused to allow further inspection.

(3.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of refusal of the prayer of local inspection the instant civil order has been filed.