Item- 5. sg 03-09-2025 Ct. 16 SAT 55 of 2023 CAN 3 of 2025 Satya Pandit Versus Dhrubaram Kanu Mr. Sounak Bhattacharyya Mr. Gourab Ghosh …for the appellant Mr. Sukanta Das …for the respondent 1. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appeal may be admitted on the ground that after the suit property was purchased, no letter of attornment was issued in favour of the present appellant. 3. However, it has not been disputed that even if no such letter of attornment was issued, the relationship with the parties would be governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and the lease would be determinable upon all the parties under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The aforesaid plea was, however, not urged at all before the learned Trial Court or before the learned First Appellate Court. 4. Both the courts have elaborately dealt with this aspect of the matter and there is a concurrent finding of fact that the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act has been duly served upon the appellant. 5. In view thereof, we feel that the appeal does not involve any substantial questions of law. The appeal is not admitted and hence, dismissed. 6. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, CAN 3 of 2025 stands dismissed. (Soumen Sen, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.) 2