Arindam Ghosh vs Abbasuddin Sarkar — 83/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section none. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 06th May 2026.

Title Appeal

CNR: WBHG010036182025

Case disposed

Filing Number

1656/2025

Filing Date

08-09-2025

Registration No

83/2025

Registration Date

08-09-2025

Court

Disrtrict and Sessions Judge, Hooghly

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

06th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section none

Petitioner(s)

Arindam Ghosh

Adv. SANTANU GHOSAL

Respondent(s)

Abbasuddin Sarkar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge

06-05-2026

Disposed

24-04-2026

Judgement

22-04-2026

Hearing

10-04-2026

Hearing

13-03-2026

LCR

Final Orders / Judgements

06-05-2026
Copy of Judgement

Case Summary: Title Appeal 83/2025 The District Judge dismissed defendant Arindam Ghosh's appeal against an eviction decree, upholding the trial court's decision that he must vacate the suit property (a ground-floor shop room) owned by plaintiff Abbasuddin Sarkar. The court confirmed the landlord-tenant relationship and validity of the eviction notice dated 28 May 2018, rejecting the defendant's claims of perpetual tenancy and non-joinder of his brother. However, the appellate court modified the judgment to award the plaintiff a preliminary decree for mesne profits (pending inquiry), removing the trial court's erroneous adjustment against alleged advance payments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

10-04-2026
Copy of Order
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Title Appeal 83/2025 The District Judge dismissed defendant Arindam Ghosh's appeal against an eviction decree, upholding the trial court's decision that he must vacate the suit property (a ground-floor shop room) owned by plaintiff Abbasuddin Sarkar. The court confirmed the landlord-tenant relationship and validity of the eviction notice dated 28 May 2018, rejecting the defendant's claims of perpetual tenancy and non-joinder of his brother. However, the appellate court modified the judgment to award the plaintiff a preliminary decree for mesne profits (pending inquiry), removing the trial court's erroneous adjustment against alleged advance payments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Disrtrict and Sessions Judge, Hooghly All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case