AYAN CHATTERJEE Vs. FUTURE TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three first miscellaneous appeals were taken up together as these are preferred against the self-same order being order dated 6th April, 2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, 9th Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 3 of 2005 thereby disposing of an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiff by directing the parties to maintain status quo over the suit property with a finding that the plaintiff is in possession of the same and that the defendant No.2 failed to prove that he was in possession of the property in his personal capacity.

(2.) F.M.A.T. No. 1335 of 2005 has been filed by defendant No.2, F.M.A.T. No. 1345 of 2005 has been preferred by defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff has come up with a separate appeal being F.M.A.T. No. 1335 of 2005 against the said order.

(3.) The plaintiff filed a suit in the 9th Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Alipore being Title Suit No.3 of 2005 thereby praying for declaration that the plaintiff was a tenant under defendant No.1 in respect of the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos.1 and 2, their servants and agents from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff in the suit property as also of its furniture, fixture and computer and other equipments kept therein in any manner whatsoever. The plaintiff prayed for further declaration that the defendant No.2 had no right to operate the bank account of the plaintiff being current account No.0029-136274-050 with the Gariahat Branch of defendant No.3. The plaintiff further prayed for mandatory injunction directing defendant No.3 to allow the plaintiff and/or the individual authorised by the plaintiff to operate the said bank account.