GOUR CHANDRA SAHA Vs. PARIMAL KUMAR BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the Court. - -Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) IT appears that the appellant has preferred this LPA unnecessarily in view of the fact that in the writ petition being WP(C) No. 168/2012 the petitioners who are tenants in the property of the appellant, though sought for only relief of getting a new water connection and the learned single Judge has only passed order that the petitioners may submit a fresh application which may be considered by the concerned authority.

(3.) ONCE the premises has been let out to the tenant the landlord has no right to put any obstruction in getting electricity and water connection at the tenant's cost and there cannot be any reason for raising objection by the landlord in such matters which may be one of the way of putting obstruction in peaceful enjoyment of the let out property as well as which may result into unnecessary dispute and also unnecessary litigation. One of such example is present LPA. This LPA is an abuse of the process of the Court.