No. 8/18.12.2008.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Heard Mr. Bag, the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant and Mr. Jha, the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent.  The facts necessary for deciding this appeal are that the Complainant being the Respondent here filed the complaint praying inter alia for granting possession of the disputed shop room in favour of the Complainant.  The Forum below while allowing the complaint took into consideration the fact that the Municipality did not contest the proceeding as also the facts disclosed from the Affidavit (Exhibit – 2) affirmed by one Sri Adhir Biswas, Ex-Chairman, Islampur Municipality admitting payment of Rs. 35,000/- by the deceased husband of the present Complainant.

Mr. Bag, appearing for the Appellant advanced two contentions.  First contention is that though notice was served and the Ex-Chairman of the Municipality appeared on some occasions but as it is apparent from the impugned judgement that he did not contest the proceeding for good number of days and, therefore, the Municipality suffered an ex parte order.  The second contention of Mr. Bag is that on merit the Municipality has a strong case as the Complainant even failed to produce the Receipt showing payment of the said sum of Rs. 35,000/-.  The contention of Mr. Bag further is that in view of political differences the stand taken by different Chairmen earlier ultimately caused loss to the Municipality and, therefore, the Appellant is to be granted opportunity to contest the proceeding before the Forum below after setting aside the present impugned judgement.

We have considered contentions of the parties and we find that when admittedly the notice was served and the then Chairman of the Municipality appeared in the proceeding and took adjournments on some occasions for filing Written Version, thereafter when the proceeding was allowed to be decided ex parte neither the Forum was wrong nor the Complainant was at fault.  The allegation of Mr. Bag that by reason of political differences this result has occurred, is not borne by any acceptable records and, therefore, such contention cannot be accepted as basis for any decision.  With regard to merit also we find that though admittedly the Receipt for the said payment of Rs. 35,000/- could not be produced by the Complainant but the Affidavit of the then Chairman of Islampur Municipality having admitted the payment of Rs. 35,000/- mentioning the Receipt Nos. 860 & 872 showing payment by the husband of the Complainant of the said amount, we do not find any reason to interfere with such findings.  In the circumstances the impugned judgement is affirmed.  The appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.