Dismissed

Juran Das v. the Administrator (Lieutenant Governor) and Ors.

Calcutta HC10 Nov 2021CO/17/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair dismissed the revisional application seeking an injunction against eviction proceedings. The Court held that the refusal of a temporary injunction by the lower court constituted a valid 'decision' under Regulation 202(8) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulations, 1966, exhausting the remedy available to the

What did the court decide?

The Revisional Application was dismissed. The Civil Judge(Senior Division), Mayabunder was directed to dispose of the Title Suit No.7 of 2019 within eight months.

Juran Das Vs the Administrator (Lieutenant Governor)… — Landlord and Tenant | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR

CO/17/2021

Juran Das

… Appellant Vs.

The Administrator (Lieutenant Governor) and others … Respondent

¶7

Mr. A. S. Kumar, Advocate … for the appellant Mr.MP.Kamraj, Advocate … for the respondents

¶8

November 10, 2021 [GNC] Item no.7

¶9

The Revisionist is aggrieved by an order No.12 dated 6^th September, 2021 passed by Additional District Judge, Mayabunder in Misc. Appeal No.1 of 2020. The appeal arose out of the Title Suit No.7 of 2019 i.e. filed before the Civil Judge(Senior Division), Mayabunder.

¶10

By the impugned order, the lower Appellate Court below has concurred with the First Court that the petitioner it not entitled to any injunction against the eviction proceedings instituted by the Tehsildar.

¶11

Counsel for the Revisionist would place reliance upon section 202 sub-section (8) of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulations, 1966 and the Rules of 1968. It is submitted that the Tehsildar was issued notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 of notice of institution of suit and since the suit has been filed the Tehsildar was to await any decision in the pending suit. It is, therefore, submitted that his client was entitled to injunction against eviction by the Tehsildar.

¶12

This Court notes that sub-section (8) of section 202 of the said 1966 Regulation is a temporary protection granted to an occupant of property to demonstrate before a Civil Court even prima facie his right in respect of the property in question. The period of three months is over and the impugned order concurring with the refusal of the injunction, of the First Court, is a clear indication of the mind of the Court. The Revisionist has therefore exhausted remedy available under sub-section (8) of section 202 of the said 1966 Regulations.

¶13

This Court is of the view that the expression ‘decision of a civil court’ would also include an order of refusal of temporary injunction, and not only be restricted to a decree. Temporary injunctions are granted in aid of the final relief. The Court not having found favour even prima facie with the writ petitioner has

¶14

¶15

refused temporary injunction. It is therefore a clear indication to the Tehsildar that there is no order preventing him from taking steps under the notice of eviction.

¶16

For the reasons stated hereinabove, the Revisional Application stands dismissed.

¶17

The Registry shall communicate a copy of this order to the Tehsildar.

¶18

Since an innocuous prayer is made by the Revisionist for expeditious disposal of the suit, it is ordered, that the Title Suit No.7 of 2019 shall be disposed of by the Civil Judge(Senior Division), Mayabunder within a period of eight months from the date of communication of a copy of this order.

¶19

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)

Juran Das v. the Administrator (Lieutenant Governor) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juran Das v. the Administrator (Lieutenant Governor) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Paul Vs Union Territory, Andaman and Nicobar Islands

Gopal Das Vs the State (through Ld. Public Prosecutor)

Muthu Swamy Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration

M/s Gcvd Infratech Private Limited Vs Union of India

Narayan Mondal Vs the Andaman and Nicobar Administration

Susheela Vs the Registrar, Central Registrar of Birth and Death and Others