Calcutta High Court
CO/3429/2026 of ANJALI DUTTA Vs PINKU CHAKRABORTY on 29 September 2026
sg 29-09-2026 Ct. 6 CO 3429 of 2026 Anjali Dutta Versus Pinku Chakraborty Mr. Debjit Mukherjee Ms. Susmita Chatterjee Ms. Dipanwita Ganguly …for the petitioners Mr. Shashwat Nayak …for the opposite party This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Item-
25. sg
29-09-2026
Ct. 6
CO 3429 of 2026
Anjali Dutta Versus Pinku Chakraborty
Mr. Debjit Mukherjee Ms. Susmita Chatterjee Ms. Dipanwita Ganguly
…for the petitioners Mr. Shashwat Nayak
…for the opposite party
This application under Article of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the appellants and is directed against an order being No. 9 dated 8th July, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 4th Court at Alipore. By the order impugned, the application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 stood rejected. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. It is now well-settled that an application under Sections 7(1) and 7(2) of the 1997 Act is maintainable only if a suit is instituted on the grounds contemplated under Section 6 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. After going through the plaint of this suit, this Court is of the considered view that the learned trial judge was right in holding that the instant suit has not been filed on any of the grounds under Sect4ion 6 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. In view thereof, an application under Section 7(1) and 7(2) of the 1997 Act was clearly not maintainable as rightly held by the learned trial judge. For such reason, this Court is not inclined to
interfere with the order impugned. The civil revision application stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)