A Supreme Court Judgment on tenancy.

Nilima Mukherjee v Kanta Bhusan Ghosh
Appellants: Nilima Mukherjee
Respondents: Kanta Bhusan Ghosh
Date: 17/08/2001
Bench: S.S.M Quadri and S.N.Phukan
 
Facts: In the instant case one Ramesh Chand Ganguly was inducted as a tenant by the respondent in respect of the said ground floor. Late Ramesh Chand Ganguly died intestate on 15.11.87 leaving no heir on heirs. According to the respondent, on the death of late Ramesh Chand Ganguly the tenancy became extinct. The appellant, the daughter of one Pramatha Nath Banerjee, brother-in-law of Ramesh Chand Ganguly used to reside in the suit premises. The respondent asked the appellant to vacate the suit premises alleging that she was a trespasser. The appellant took the plea that she was the adopted daughter of late Ramesh Chand Ganguly. On these facts, the suit for eviction was filed which was decreed by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court. As stated above, the second appeal was also dismissed.
Issue:  Whether the appellant was the adopted daughter of late Ramesh Chand Ganguly?
Contentions: The counsel appearing for the appellant produced some documents to prove the fact of adoption. Documents were produced to show that a bank account was in the joint name of late Ramesh Chand Ganguly and the appellant. Late Ramesh Chand Ganguly used to draw freedom fighters pension and a document was produced to show that in the nomination papers, the appellant was described as his daughter. These documents were duly considered by both the courts below and rejected by giving cogent reasons. Regarding nominating the appellant to draw pension on behalf of late Ramesh Chand Ganguly, the first appellate court has also noted that in the said paper there was no seal of the concerned authority. Mere paper there was no seal of the concerned authority. Mere having a joint bank account would not prove adoption in absence of any other cogent evidence.
Conclusion: From perusal of the judgments of the both the courts and the evidence recorded the court find that the appellant has miserably failed to prove that she was actually given in adoption by her father and taken on adoption by late Ramesh Chand Ganguly. Accordingly, the Apex Court held that both the courts below have rightly rejected the plea of adoption set up by the appellant. And in the present case, there is not an iota of evidence to show that any ceremony of adoption was performed and the appellant was actually handed over for adoption by her parents to late Ramesh Chand Ganguly.
Decision: The present appeal is dismissed.
SUBMITTED BY:- SHUBHANGI GUPTA.