ANIL KUMAR MAITY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a rare case where the facts are such that despite the prayers of the petition not being appropriately framed, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner because he has been subjected to grave injustice. I proceed to grant relief to the petitioner keeping in mind that Article 226 of the Constitution ex facie confers a wide power on the High Courts to reach injustice wherever it is found [see Dwarkanath v. I.T.O., AIR 1966 SC 81, followed in Shri Anadi Mukta Sadguru S.M. V.S.J.M.S. Trust v. V.R. Rudani, AIR 1989 SC 1607] and that if foundation for grant of a particular relief is laid and a party is entitled to relief on merits, an application cannot be thrown out simply on the ground that the proper writ or direction has not been prayed for and it would be permissible for the Writ Court to mould the relief for ends of justice.

(2.) Certain basic facts are required to be noted for appreciating the plight of the petitioner.

(3.) After being involved in a gruelling litigation for eleven long years, the petitioner succeeded in the suit instituted by him (T.S. No.337 of 1987) before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1 st Court at Barasat, North 24-Parganas, in which he prayed for eviction of his tenant Bhola Nath Mondal (the defendant) and recovery of possession of the suit property. During pendency of the suit, Bhola Nath died. His legal heirs were brought on record who contested the suit as defendants. The suit was decreed in part, on contest, on 4.8.98. The defendants were directed to vacate the suit premises in favour of the petitioner within three months from date failing which the petitioner was given liberty to execute the decree through Court.