JOYDEB KARMAKAR & ORS Vs. JYOTISH HAWLADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr Mukherjee assisted by Mr Biswas representing the petitioners-plaintiffs-landlords (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners), and Mr Nure Zaman assisted by Mr Badsha and Mr Shahid representing the opposite partydefendant-tenant.

(2.) The revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India arose due to rejection of an application under Order 39 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure submitted for the second time by the petitioners who have filed the suit for eviction on the grounds of bona fide requirement for accommodating their business.

(3.) Mr Mukherjee relied upon a decision of learned single Judge of this court in the case of Sk. Ahmed Ali v. Qurresha Bibi & Ors., 2010 3 CalHN 435 and also another single Bench decision in the case of Atanu Basak v. Shiba Prasad Mukherjee, 2010 4 CalHN 221 and criticized the impugned order Order No.125 dated August 3, 2016 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kalna in Title Suit No.67 of 2009 by arguing that when the suit for eviction was filed on the grounds of bona fide requirement, then to prove the case of the landlords, local inspection is one of the best methods.