Shyam Narayan Halder & Ors vs Ar Sri Swapan Roy & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 711 Cal

10      24.01.2022

                                            SAT 404 of 2015
Ct-08                                                with
                                I.A No. CAN 1 of 2017(Old CAN No. 809 of 2017)

                                        Shyam Narayan Halder & Ors.
                                                    Vs.
ar                                         Sri Swapan Roy & Ors.


                           The appellants are not represented.
                           The department has reported that the defects
                     pointed out by the stamp reporter in its report
                     dated 3rd September, 2015 have not yet been
                     removed.
                           It    appears     that     the    appellants    are    not
                     interested to proceed with the appeal. However,
                     in absence of the certified copies of the judgment
                     and decree of the trial court being filed we left no
                     other option but to consider the question of
                     admission of the second appeal.
                           On the basis of the order passed by the first
                     appellate court the first appellate court in its
                     order recorded that the earlier suit filed by the
                     appellants being Suit No. 150 of 1990, in which
                     it was alleged that the appellants/defendants
                     borrowed          Rs.800/-       under      necessity       from
                     Dhirendranath, was dismissed on merits.
                           Dhirendranath purchased the suit property
                     from Jitendranath by deed of sale. The said sale
                     deed was exhibited and not disputed.
                           The first appellate court considered the
                     exhibit-5 and the exhibit-6, wherefrom it appears
                     that Dhirendranath and others left the house as
                     they were apprehended by police and taking
                     advantage of the said fact the appellants entered
                     the         property        in         absence       of      the
                     respondents/plaintiffs.

The respondents/plaintiffs could not prove their title or put forward a better title. In absence of the appellants, we are of the view that the first appellate court in affirming the order of the trial court has, on proper appreciation of facts and law, affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. On such consideration, we feel no such substantial question of law is involved in this appeal.

The appeal accordingly fails and is hereby dismissed along with CAN 809 of 2017. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. There will be no order as to costs.

(Uday Kumar ,J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)