SHYAMAPADA GHOSH ALIAS SHYAMAPRASAD GHOSH Vs. ARATI PURKAIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 29th November 2016 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court at Hooghly in Title Appeal No. 40 of 2014 affirming the judgement and decree passed in Title Suit No. 337 of 2010 by the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court at Hooghly, District Hooghly, at the instance of the plaintiff.

(2.) Let us now consider as to whether any substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal for which this appeal is required to be admitted for hearing under the provision of Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) Initially, the plaintiff filed a suit being Title Suit No. 209 of 1990 claiming relief on the basis of a bilateral agreement allegedly entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant. It was stated by the plaintiff that the suit property originally belonged to the defendant, who proposed to give "kha" schedule property to the plaintiff on rental basis on condition to renovate the said room and to make it useable for business purpose. On the basis of such agreement, the plaintiff invested a sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- (two lakhs forty thousand) but subsequently the defendant refused to hand-over the key of the said suit room to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff filed the said suit seeking relief on the strength of the said agreement.