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

1921 Supreme(SC) 50

LORD SHAW, LORD PHILLIMORE, AMEER ALI
BIPRADAS PAL CHOWDHURY – Appellant
Versus
KAMINI KUMAR LAHIRI – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellant: Watkins & Hunter.

Judgement

Consolidated Appeals, one (No. 65 of 1920) from a judgment and eighty-eight decrees (February 12, 1914) of the High Court, reversing decrees (June 2 and 19, 1911) of the District Judge of Nadia on appeal from the Munsif of Krishnagar ; the other (No. 12 of 1920) from a judgment and sixty-three decrees (May 29, 1917) of the High Court affirming decrees (August 30, 1915) of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Nadia on appeal from the Munsif of Ranaghat.

The consolidated appeals arose out of numerous suits brought in the Munsifs Court on November 8, 1907, and on subsequent dates by the appellant against the various respondents. In each case the appellant as purchaser of a patni taluk at a sale under s. 165 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885, sued to recover lands occupied by the respondents within the patni taluk, alleging that his cause of action arose on November 28, 1899, the date of his auction purchase. The defendants by their written statements pleaded, so far as is material, (1.) that the lands in question were lakhiraj and not mal lands; (2.) that the suit was barred by limitation ; and (3.) that their tenure was not an incumbrance which the plaintiff could annul by law























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