SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1950 Supreme(SC) 9

B.K.MUKHERJEE, M.C.MAHAJAN, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI
Manieklal Mansukhbhai – Appellant
Versus
Hormusji Jamshedji Ginwall – Respondent


Advocates:
B.J.THAKUR, DEVAN CHARANJIT LAL, GANPAT RAI, NANAK CHAND GUPTA, S.P.Varma

Judgment

Mahajan J. - This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Bombay dated 9th March 1943 and made in second Appeal No- 717 of 1940 varying the decree of the Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad, in Appeal No. 173 of 1936 reversing the decree of the joint SubJudge, Ahmedabad, in suit No. 830 of 1933.

2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the respondent firm in ejectment to recover possession of survey Nos. 222, 223, 225 and 226 situate in Rampura in Ahmedabad district and for mesne profits, as early as July 1933 and during its 17 years span of life it had a somewhat chequered career. Those responsible for drawing up the pleadings did not take pains to comprehend correctly as to what they were about and the whole litigation was conducted in a slovenly and slipshod manner. Evidence which should have been produced at the beginning was allowed to be produced at a much late stage after the case went back on remand and the suit was determined by the Assistant Judge on fresh issues and fresh materials. It was in this confused state of the record that it was eventually decided by the High Court and its judgment is by no means satisfactory. The long tim




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top