Champa Senapati v. Arun Karuri

Ct. No. 04 SA 240 of 2011 SAT 448 of 2010 AN 24.08.2021 Smt. Champa Senapati vs.

Sri Arun Karuri Mr. Animesh Das Mr. Dipankar Ghosh ... for appellant Mr. Das, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant, who was defendant in the suit for eviction of licencee. He submits, both Courts erroneously found his client to be licencee though she is tenant. By reason of appellant having been sister-in-law of the owner, since deceased and who was donor to plaintiff, no rent receipt was granted or asked on payment of rent at Rs. 50/- per month. Leaving that aside his client's main contention is that the property, in which the demise, stands acquired by Howrah Improvement Trust (H.I.T.). As such he submits, a question be formulated on whether a suit for eviction of licencee, in respect of an acquired property, can be decreed?

We have perused judgments of the trial and lower appellate Courts. The trial Judge referred to the notice to quit given by plaintiff to appellant, not replied to. On plaintiff's title said Court though said it was there to decide status of defendant and not title of plaintiff, found that there was recital of delivery of possession in the deed of gift, implying acceptance and appellant could not prove

by cogent evidence that the property stood acquired. The lower appellate Court concurred on all findings. We do not see any question of law arising from the judgments.

SA 240 of 2011 is dismissed.

(Arindam Sinha, J.) (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)