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

1992 Supreme(SC) 381

K.RAMASWAMY, N.M.KASLIWAL
PARBATI DEVI JAISWAL – Appellant
Versus
KEDAR LAL JAISWAL – Respondent


( 1 ). Special leave granted.

( 2 ). The facts of the case are that the said premises were leased out by sourendra Nath Mukherjee and Rabindra Nath Mukherjee in favour of a partnership firm, namely, M/s Thakurdin Ramjosh as back as on 7/9/1949. A partition took place between Sourendra Nath Mukherjee and Rabindra Nath mukherjee by virtue of a written deed of partition dated 16/7/1962. The property in question was allotted to the share of Sourendra Nath Mukherjee. Sourendra Nath Mukherjee then filed a Suit No. 636 of 1968 on 19-9-1968 in the City Civil court, Calcutta against the partnership firm, namely, M/s thakurdin Ramjosh for recovery of possession of the premises.

( 3 ). The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff on 13/4/1973. M/s thakurdin Ramjosh through Kedar Lal Jaiswal filed an appeal in the High court. During the pendency of the appeal, Sourendra Nath Mukherjee executed a lease for 99 years in favour of the appellants on 10/3/1979 on receipt of , premium amounting to Rs. 1,32,125. 00. Subsequently, by a Deed of Conveyance dated 16/11/1979, the said Shri Sourendra Nath Mukherjee sold, conveyed and transferred all his rights, title, interest in the suit property in fav




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