KRUSHAN CHANDRA NAYAK ANSHUNATH CHAKRABORTY vs GOBINDA CHARAN PYNE — FAT /561/2025

Case under No Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 23rd March 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0591912025

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

24th December 2025

Filing Number

FAT /544/2025

Filing Date

18-12-2025

Registration No

FAT /561/2025

Registration Date

18-12-2025

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

GROUP B (CIVIL MATTERS) ( 2 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

STAMP REPORTER (SR) SECTION

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Acts & Sections

NO ACT Section NA

Petitioner(s)

KRUSHAN CHANDRA NAYAK ANSHUNATH CHAKRABORTY

Respondent(s)

GOBINDA CHARAN PYNE

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

24-12-2025

FOR ADMISSION

20-03-2026

APPLICATION (CIVIL)

18-03-2026

APPLICATION (CIVIL)

17-03-2026

APPLICATION (CIVIL)

11-03-2026

APPLICATION (CIVIL)

Orders

23-03-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed an appeal challenging an eviction decree, upholding the trial court's judgment. The court found that the plaintiff (respondent) held valid landlord rights over the property through a gift deed from his mother and was entitled to evict the defendant (appellant), who was essentially a trespasser lacking valid tenant status under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. The appellant was granted 90 days to vacate the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed an appeal challenging an eviction decree, upholding the trial court's judgment. The court found that the plaintiff (respondent) held valid landlord rights over the property through a gift deed from his mother and was entitled to evict the defendant (appellant), who was essentially a trespasser lacking valid tenant status under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. The appellant was granted 90 days to vacate the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case