Judgment:
ORDER
SHEET GA No.1083 of 2012 CS No.140 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE LUMINO INDUSTRIES Versus BHANWAR LAL BAID & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :
5. h June, 2012.
Mr.A.K.Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Pratap Chaterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Ms.Rajshree Kajaria, Adv.Mr.Sarvapriya Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Soumabho Ghose, Adv.…for the plaintiff Mr.Satadip Bhattacharya, Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Adversus …for respondent No.9 Mr.Nirmalya M.
Bhattcharya, Adv.…for United Bank of India The Court : Mr.Saraf for Punjab National Bank, the sixth defendant submits that his client does not have any claim over the subject two flats.
This position is not controverted by any party in Court.
Let the sixth defendant be deleted from the cause title.
There is some complication in this matter.
The fourth defendant claims to be the purchaser of flat Nos.5A and 5B in premises No.12A, Camac Street, Kolkata.
Such purchase was said to have been made on 2nd March, 2012 from the fiRs.and second defendants.
This transaction is disputed by the learned Counsel appearing for the eighth defendant bank, the ICICI and the fifth defendant bank, the United Bank of India.
The plaintiff, through Mr.Anindya Kumar Mitra, learned senior Advocate states that the ninth defendant was the tenant/lessee of the two flats, from 7th November, 2009 and assigned it to the plaintiff on 1st May, 2011.
At the moment the plaintiff wants to deposit the rent payable by them in the registry of this Court.
This prayer is opposed by the learned Counsel for the two banks on the ground that in this way the plaintiff will claim tenancy.
It is submitted on their behalf that the occupation of the plaintiff is wrongful.
This Court should not entertain their application.
Steps have already been taken by United Bank of India under the SARFAESI Act.
They have powers under the said Act to deal with the alleged wrongful occupation of the plaintiff.
I have gone through the report of the joint special officeRs.Let copies of this report be circulated by the joint special officers to the parties immediately.
This report depicts that the plaintiff is in possession of the entire flat 5B and a portion of flat 5A.
Right at the moment nothing was shown to me to suggest that the banks have powers under the SARFAESI Act to evict the plaintiff.
This question has to be gone into upon affidavits.
Let affidavits be filed according to the following directions : Affidavit-in-opposition by 15th June, 2012.
List this application on 27th June, 2012.
Affidavit in reply may be filed in the meantime.
I direct the plaintiff to deposit the rent being paid by them i.e.Rs.52,500/- per month from March, 2012 with the joint special officeRs.The joint special officers will deposit the said rent in a savings bank account to be opened and operated by them jointly.
They will be entitled to retain monthly remuneration of 200 GMs.each from the said rent collected.
The above deposit of rent will be strictly without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.
The bank will not authorise any other withdrawl unless supported by a Court Order.
All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings.
(I.P.MUKERJI, J.) TR/