Bimala Sarkar v. Arup Kr Sarkar
Case brief
What is this about?
Hon'ble Single Judge modified impugned order in landlord-tenant dispute regarding water supply, allowing tenant to install new pipework from overhead tank at own cost while disapproving direct connection to underground reservoir.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order modified to allow tenant to install new pipeline from overhead tank at own cost if existing pipework is defective, while disallowing direct connection from underground reservoir.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
24.02.2022 Ct. 21 D/L 18 ab
C.O. 1040 of 2021
(Via Video Conference)
Smt. Bimala Sarkar -Vs- Arup Kumar Ghosh
Mr. Sukanta Chakraboty, Mr. Anindya Halder,
... for the petitioner
Mr. Sukanta Chakraborty, learned advocate appears for the petitioner.
The learned advocate for the petitioner files two affidavit of service. Let the same be kept with the record.
No one appears from the side of the opposite party/defendant.
The revisional application is taken up for hearing.
The present application is at the instance of the plaintiff/landlord/petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Sealdah, South 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 79 of 1999 whereby the learned Court below has permitted the tenant/opposite party herein to use water coming from the overhead tank which has been installed by the plaintiff/petitioner
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether tenant can take direct water connection from underground reservoir denying overhead tank supply.
Whether impugned order allowing water from overhead tank with proper pipework is afit modification.
Whether revisional application should be allowed or modified.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Smt. Bimala Sarkar
- respondent
Arup Kumar Ghosh
Coram
Kesang Doma Bhutia
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Calcutta HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- CO/1040/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court