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

1982 Supreme(SC) 9

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
.N. BHAGWATI AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.
Sourindra Mohan Hazra, Appellant
Versus
State of W.B. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 108 of 1982.
Decided on 11-1-1982.

Headnote:

Civil Appeal – Title suit decreed - This is an appeal by special leave against judgment passed by the Calcutta High Court allowingSecond Appeal preferred by the 1st respondent against the judgment or the District judge, confirming decree passed by the 3rd Court of Munsif at Burdwan in Title Suit - When the second appeal reached hearing before the High Court on 11-1-1979 the appellant who was the principal respondent in the 2nd appeal could not remain present, since according to him - Held, Calcutta High Court and remand the second appeal to the Calcutta High Court for disposal according to law - Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, J.:— This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment dated 11-1-79 passed by the Calcutta High Court allowing the Second Appeal preferred by the 1st respondent against the judgment or the District judge, Burdwan confirming the decree passed by the 3rd Court of the Munsif at Burdwan in Title Suit No. 65 of 1968. When the second appeal reached hearing before the High Court on 11-1-1979 the appellant who was the principal respondent in the 2nd appeal could not remain present, since according to him, he was not served with the notice of the appeal and the result was that the second appeal was allowed by the High Court ex parte against the appellant. We are of the view that the appellant had sufficient cause for not appearing at the hearing of the second appeal and the present appeal must therefore be allowed the judgment and order passed by the Calcutta High Court allowing the second appeal must be set aside and the second appeal must be remitted to the Calcutta High Court for disposal according to law.

2. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Calcutta High Court and remand the second appeal to the Calcutta High Court for disposal according to law. There will be no order as to costs of this appeal.

3. Since we have already allowed the appeal preferred against the judgment and order dated Jan. 11, 1979 passed by the Calcutta High Court allowing the second appeal of the first respondent ex parte against the appellant, Special Leave Petition No. 4378/80 does not survive and hence there will be no order on that special leave petition.

Appeal allowed.

For Citation : AIR 1982 SC 1170

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 Back to top