Tripura High Court
RSA/5/2026 of Shyamal Paul Vs Smti. Arati Paul and ors on 24 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_ RSA No. 05 of 2026 Shyamal Paul, S/o. Late Binode Bihari Paul, resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala, District- West Tripura …….Appellant(s) - VERSUS - 1. Smti. Arati Paul, W/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul Resident of the
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
RSA No. 05 of 2026
Shyamal Paul,
S/o. Late Binode Bihari Paul, resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala, District- West Tripura
…….Appellant(s)
- VERSUS -
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.
1. Smti. Arati Paul, W/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul Resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, P.O. and P.S.- Teliamura, District- Khowai Tripura
2. Sri Subhash Chandra Paul, S/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
3. Sri Anup Kr. Paul, S/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
4. Sri Ajay Kumar Paul, S/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
5. Sri Arun Kumar Paul, S/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
6. Sri Barun Kumar Paul, S/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
7. Smti Sima Paul, D/o. Late Sudhir Chandra Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
8. Smti Jharna Paul, W/o. Late Uttam Paul, resident of the premises of Radha Cinema, Assam Agartala Road, PO and PS- Teliamura, District - Khowai Tripura.
9. Sri Prasenjit Paul, S/O- Late Kajal Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
10. Smti Priyanka Paul, W/O- Sri Sourav Giri D/O- Late Kajal Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
11. Smti Rita Paul, W/O- late Nihar Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
12. Smti Soma Paul, W/O- Lt. Pritam Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
13. Smti Asmita Paul, D/O- Lt. Pritam Paul being minor, is represented by her natural guardian/mother Smti Soma Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
14. Sri Haradhan Paul, S/O- Late Binode Bihari Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura.
15. Smti Maya Kundu, W/O- Sri Alok Kundu D/O- Late Binode Bihari Paul Resident of Surya Road, P.O.- Agartala, P.S.- West Agartala District-West Tripura. ……….Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pradip Chakraborty, Advocate, Ms. Sukriti Debnath, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None.
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO =O=R=D=E=R= 24/03/2026 This Second Appeal is preferred by the unsuccessful plaintiff who sued for perpetual injunction, which suit was dismissed both by the Trial Court as well as by the lower Appellate Court. Both the Courts below have held on appreciation of evidence that the family settlement dt. 10.01.1997 being relied upon by the appellant is not related to the suit schedule property, and that the appellant did not file any document to prove his possession over the said scheduled property on the date of filing of the suit. Though counsel for the appellant seeks to challenge the findings of facts recorded by the Courts below, it is settled law that under Section 100 CPC, concurrent findings of facts recorded by the Courts below, should not be interfered with normally. Therefore, I do not find any merit on this Second Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Pending Application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ)
Manti D/B SIDDHARTHA LODH Digitally signed by SIDDHARTHA LODH Date: 2026.03.24 12:51:09 +02'00'