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

1970 Supreme(SC) 377

J.C.SHAH, K.S.HEGDE, A.N.GROVER
India Electric Works – Appellant
Versus
James Mantosh – Respondent


Advocates:
D.N.Mishra, G.L.SANGHI, P.CHATTERJI, P.K.GHOSH

Judgment

GROVER, J.:- (For himself and on behalf of Shah C. J.).

This is an appeal by certificate from a judgment of the Calcutta High Court in which the sole question for determination is whether the suit was barred by limitation.

2. The material facts may be stated. The appellant before us was the defendant in a suit for recovery of damages with interest and costs. The suit was decreed by the trial judge and that decree has been upheld by the High Court. The defendant was a tenant under the predecessor of the plaintiffs in respect of the shed and structures described in Schedule A of the plaint. In or about the year 1939 the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs filed a title suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Alipore for ejectment and damages. A compromise took place between the parties but the defendant did not vacate the premises in terms of the compromise and continued to remain in occupation of the same. The property was requisitioned under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules and Government took its possession on February 2, 1944. It was dere quisitioned on November 21, 1945. For the period from February 2, 1944 to November 21, 1945 the plaintiffs received mont




















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