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

1971 Supreme(Cal) 93

SALIL KUMAR DATTA
NRIMAL KUMAR MOULIK – Appellant
Versus
CHAMPABALA ROY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BHUPENDRA KUMAR PANDA, Hariprasanna Mukherji, JAMINI KUMAR BANERJEE, Jayindra Nath Nanda, MAHINDRA NATH GHOSH

SALIL KUMAR DATTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by defendants Nos. 1 to 11 against a judgment of concurrence decreeing the plaintiff's suit. The suit property is comprised in C. S. Plot No. 1158, khatian No. 152 Mouza Noapara. P. S. Barasat. The case of the plaintiff is that she is the owner of the lands mentioned above along with other adjacent lands. Her house is on the contiguous north of the suit land which was an adjunct of her residence. Plot No. 1159 is situated on the west of the suit land, also belonging to the plaintiff. She planned a residential colony known as 'lakshminarayan colony' on her lands mentioned above and in the plan prepared by her for the purpose she loosely described the suit land as a Park, though it was never intended to be a Park in the true sense. The plaintiff had the desire to keep this land vacant for the purpose of sufficient air and light for her own residence and also for accommodation for ceremonial occasions usually held in the presence of Sri Sri Lakshminarayan Bigraha till then in her house and for other religious occasions. The plaintiff constructed pucca pathways running the four sides of the suit land. Defendants Nos. 1 to 17 were residents










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