SUSANTA KUMAR ADGIRI Vs. BIKASH RANJAN MAITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revisional application, the petitioner/defendant has sought to assail the order being No. 15 dated 15.9.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division). 2nd Court, Tamluk in other suit No. 51 of 2005 rejecting the petitioner's prayer for local investigation.

(2.) The O.P./plaintiffs instituted the said suit for eviction of the petitioner/defendant from the disputed shop room situated on plot Nos. 396/1046 and 396/1047 of Mouza-Garsfat. P.S. Moina on the grounds of default and reasonable requirement after serving notice under section 106 of the T.P. Act. The petitioner/ defendant inter alia took a plea that the disputed premises is situated not on plot No. 396/1047 but on plot No. 297. In the petition for local investigation it has been asserted by the petitioner that the said plot 297 belongs to the District Board under the State of West Bengal. As such, the petitioner filed a petition for local investigation to ascertain whether the disputed premises appertains to plots 396/1046 and 396/1047 which was refused by the impugned order.

(3.) Mr. Chatterjee, learned Counsel for the petitioner. contended that the local investigation as prayed for by his client is absolutely essential, since if the disputed premises is found to appertain plot No. 297, the suit for eviction by the O.P./plaintiffs does not lie, apart from the fact that the suit would suffer from misdescription of property.