SRIMATTYA REKHA ROY AND ANR vs SRI SOUMITRA PARUI AND ORS — 50/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 20th May 2026.

Case disposed

Title Appeal

CNR: WBSP100029342022

Filing Number

1501/2022

Filing Date

17-Dec-2022

Registration No

50/2022

Registration Date

17-Dec-2022

Court

Additional District Judge,Diamond Harbour Civil, South 24 Pgs.

Judge

4-Ftc III

Decision Date

20-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 30-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 151

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SRIMATTYA REKHA ROY AND ANR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SRI SOUMITRA PARUI AND ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-May-2026

    judgementView PDF

    Case Summary: Title Appeal No. 50 of 2022 The appellate court dismissed the defendants' (Srimatya Rekha Roy and Soumen Ray) appeal against the trial court's eviction decree. The court upheld the lower court's judgment, finding the plaintiffs (Soumitra Parui and Somnath Parui) were entitled to evict the defendants from the tenanted premises based on: (1) the defendants' default in rent payment since April 2004 following the original tenant's death, and (2) the plaintiffs' reasonable requirement of the property for rebuilding purposes. The court affirmed the validity and proper service of the notice to quit dated June 20, 2005, thereby terminating the tenancy and reducing the defendants to trespassers. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-May-2026

    Disposed

    Ftc III

  4. 11-May-2026

    Judgement

    Ftc III

  5. 08-May-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  6. 27-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  7. 20-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  8. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  9. 21-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  10. 21-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  11. 19-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  12. 10-Nov-2025

    Show Cause

    Ftc III

  13. 01-Sep-2025

    Show Cause

    Ftc III

  14. 30-Jul-2025

    Show Cause

    Ftc III

  15. 04-Jun-2025

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  16. 14-May-2025

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  17. 24-Apr-2025

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  18. 21-Feb-2025

    Hearing

  19. 23-Dec-2024

    Hearing

  20. 07-Oct-2024

    Hearing

  21. 02-Sep-2024

    Hearing

  22. 12-Jul-2024

    Hearing

  23. 07-Jun-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  24. 07-Jun-2024

    Hearing

  25. 17-May-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  26. 17-May-2024

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  27. 08-Apr-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  28. 08-Apr-2024

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  29. 11-Mar-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  30. 11-Mar-2024

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  31. 12-Feb-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  32. 12-Feb-2024

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  33. 09-Jan-2024

    Order by CourtView PDF

  34. 09-Jan-2024

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  35. 09-Oct-2023

    Order by CourtView PDF

  36. 09-Oct-2023

    Argument / Further Argument

    Ftc III

  37. 04-Sep-2023

    Order by CourtView PDF

  38. 04-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  39. 28-Jul-2023

    Order by CourtView PDF

  40. 28-Jul-2023

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  41. 18-Apr-2023

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  42. 29-Mar-2023

    Hearing

    Ftc III

  43. 17-Dec-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  44. 17-Dec-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 50/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Title Appeal No. 50 of 2022 The appellate court dismissed the defendants' (Srimatya Rekha Roy and Soumen Ray) appeal against the trial court's eviction decree. The court upheld the lower court's judgment, finding the plaintiffs (Soumitra Parui and Somnath Parui) were entitled to evict the defendants from the tenanted premises based on: (1) the defendants' default in rent payment since April 2004 following the original tenant's death, and (2) the plaintiffs' reasonable requirement of the property for rebuilding purposes. The court affirmed the validity and proper service of the notice to quit dated June 20, 2005, thereby terminating the tenancy and reducing the defendants to trespassers. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case