USHA RANJAN ROY BURMAN Vs. SOVA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 17.8.85 passed by Sri S. P. Dutta, the Learned Additional District Judge, 11th Court, Alipore in Title Appeal No. 687 of 1984 affirming the judgment and decree, dated 7th July, 1984 passed by Sri B. Das, the Learned Second Munsif, Alipore dismissing the Title Suit No. 15 of J.982.

(2.) The plaint case in brief is that Smt. Rama Devi was previously the sole owner of the premises No. 107B, Karaya Road, Calcutta who by a registered deed of lease, dated 30th October, 1960, leased out the said premises for 21 years with effect from 1st November, 1960 to the defendant, and to Sri Dhirendra Narayan Das who is the husband of the plaintiff. The premises was divided into two parts. One bed room on the Southern side together with one kitchen, one latrine and bath with common water tap in the ground floor were leased out to the defendant as shown in Schedule B of the said deed of lease at a monthly rental of Rs. 55 payable to the lessor according to the English Calendar Month. The other part of the premises consisting at two bed rooms in the 1st floor, one bed room in the ground floor with a separate kitchen, latrine and bath as described in Schedule 'A' of the deed of lease at a monthly rental of Rs. 120 payable according to English Calendar Month was leased out to Dhirendra Narayan Das, husband of the plaintiff. During the continuance of the said lease, the said Lessor Smt. Rama Devi sold her right, title and interest in the said premises (both A and B Schedules) together with her lessor's right to the plaintiff by a registered deed, dated 16.4.81 and delivered possession thereof. As the period of lease of the defendant was going to expire on 1st November, 1981, the plaintiff caused a notice, dated 12.8.81 served on the defendant making him to vacate and quit the suit premises under the said lease within the expiry of his lease but despite receipt of the notice the defendant did not vacate the suit premises and from the date of expiry of his lease, he has been in illegal possession of the suit premises as a trespasser. So the plaintiff filed the suit for eviction of the defendant and for other reliefs. The defendant's case is that he and the husband of the plaintiff Sri Dhiren-4ra Narayan Das became the joint lessees under the common lessor by a deed of lease, dated 30th October, 1960 for a period of 21 years. He authorised Sri Dhirendra Narayan Das to negotiate with the former lessor, Smt. Rama Devi for purchasing the property in question for their common benefit. But Sri Dhirendra Narayan Das purchased the property in the benam of his wife Smt. Sova Das (plaintiff) only to defraud him. But when this fraud came to his knowledge, he wanted to assert his right of Specific Performance of Contract and Sri Dhirendra Narayan Das agreed in presence of common friends in the middle of July, 1981 that he would have a tenancy for life in respect of the suit property and on this assurance he paid rent to the plaintiff and the last rent receipt, dated 7.8.81 would show, according to him, that a new tenancy had been created between him and, the plaintiff with effect from 1st August, 1981.

(3.) The Trial Court dismissed the suit. An appeal taken by the defendant in the First Court of Appeal met with the same fate as already referred to above.