Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 115 – Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 – Ejectment suit – Landlord-tenant relationship – Municipal Holding – Defaulter in payment of rent – Revisional jurisdiction – The petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenges a judgment and decree reversing the decision of the trial court in an ejectment suit. The petitioner, Sunil Kumar Chakraborty, sought ejectment of the respondent, Ram Krishna Sen Burman, primarily on grounds of default in payment of rent. The trial court decreed in favor of the petitioner, but the appellate court reversed the decision. The petitioner contended that the appellate court’s decision was mechanical and ignored crucial evidence, leading to a miscarriage of justice.
The petitioner asserted that the premises in question, bearing Municipal Holding No. 2120, belonged to him, supported by municipal tax payments. He claimed that the defendant, a tenant, defaulted on rent payments. Despite evidence presented by the petitioner, including a local inspection report and documents showing ownership, the appellate court relied heavily on an unregistered lease deed produced by the defendant.
In its decision, the court examined the powers of revision under Section 115 of the CPC, emphasizing that revisionary jurisdiction is limited to correcting errors of law or perversity in findings. It observed that the defendant failed to substantiate objections to the landlord-tenant relationship and upheld the trial court’s decree, finding the grounds for ejectment established. (Para 22-29)
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
2023 STPL(Web) 175 Gauhati
[2024 STPL 1643 Gauhati]
Sunil Kumar Chakraborty Vs. Ram Krishna Sen Burman
CRP 208 of 2013-Decided on 6-11-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2023-STPLWeb-175-Gauhati.pdf
