3.

Case:
Record of Court Proceedings Observation

DISTRICT: South 24-ParganasIn the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.),

Sealdah, South 24-ParganasPresent:- Sri Sambhu Sarkar
Complaint Case No. 126 of 2013
Swapan Kr. Dey-------------- Plaintiff(s)
Versus
Sanjay Maitra & Ors--------------Defendant(s)

Date of Hearing: 11.02.21

This is a suit for recovery of khas possession and

Matter Fixed For :
permanent injunctionvalued at Rs. 2,00,01,000/-.This suit is filed
by Swapan Kr. Dey against Sanjay Maitra and otherspraying for
recovery of khas possession and permanent injunction valued at
Rs.Rs. 2,00,01,000/-.
Advocate Accompanied / Assistant:

Bithin Kr. DasAdvocate(s)----------------for Plaintif

Debolina Das Advocate(s)------------- for Defendant

Observation Made: The fact of the case of the plaintiff in a nutshell is that one Sunil RanjanDas and
Ajay Kr. Das jointly purchased a plot of land measuring about 6 cottah 2chittak 30 sq. ft. at plot No. 244
by virtue of deed of conveyance dt. 06.01.1981and the said plot was partitioned by metes and bounds
by a registered deed ofpartition dt. 27.07.1962 and after such partition said Sunil Ranjan Das became
thesole and absolute owner of the suit premises and got his name mutated in theKMC records and had
been paying all statutory impositions. Said Sunil RanjanDas executed and published his last Will on
07.10.1988 wherein he appointed oneDurgapada Dey as sole executor of the last will and testament and
by virtue of theprobate of the Will granted by the Hon’ble High Court on 18.03.2010 the plaintiffbecame
the owner of the suit property on the demise of testator, Sunil Ranjan Dason 06.11.1997. Thereafter the
plaintiff executed a deed of Assent on 07.04.2010and accordingly the plaintiff became the sole and
absolute owner of the suitpremises. Subsequently the ground floor of the suit premises was
illegallyoccupied by the defendant no. 1 to 3. The defendant No. 1 being the partner of thedefendant
no. 3 carries on Nursing Home Business at the ground floor of the 1stfloor and the defendants are in
occupation of the 1st floor of the suit premiseswithout any valid and lawful permission either from the
plaintiff or from hispredecessor in interest. The plaintiff further stated that the defendants are
inoccupation of the suit property without having any right, title and interest and theyare the trespassers
and as such the plaintiff has filed the instant suit praying fordecree. The cause of action of this suit arose
on and from 18.03.2010 and it is stillcontinuing and consequentially the plaintiff prays to decree the
instant suit

Things Learned: hat the suit be and the same is decreed on contest against the defendantswithout
any costs.Defendants are directed to deliver vacant, peaceful khas possession of theground floor and
first floor of the suit property as mentioned in the SecondSchedule of the plaint to the plaintiff within
three months from the date of passingof this judgment failing which the plaintiff is at liberty to put the
decree inexecution. Defendants and their men and agents are further restrained from creatingcharge,
lien, mortgage or letting out and changing the nature and character of thesuit property and/or making
obstruction to the right of ingress and egress as wellas right of use and enjoyment of the ground floor of
the suit property by theplaintiff.