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

1967 Supreme(Cal) 184

P.CHATTERJEE
BASANTA KUMAR BISWAS – Appellant
Versus
MIHIRLAL BISWAS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
APURBADHAN MUKHERJI, BANKIM CHANDRA ROY, MUKTI PRASANNA MUKHARJI

P. CHATTERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against a judgment and order passed by the appellate court dismissing an application for setting aside a sale and reversing the order of the second court of Munsif at Alipore in Execution Case No. 189 of 1956.

( 2 ) THIS application is by the judgment-debtor. The sale in question was held on 12th October, 1955 and the petition for setting aside the sale under Section 174 of the Bengal Tenancy Act was filed on 2nd January, 1959. The petitioners' case was that they had no knowledge of the sale till December, 1958 when the decree-holder came to take possession of the property by force. The case was that all processes were suppressed; that there was fraudulent suppression of all proceedings relating to the publication and conduct of the sale and, further, that the judgment-debtor was kept out of his knowledge of the remedy available to him for having the sale set aside, in other words, the petitioner requisitioned Section 18 of the Indian Limitation Act to avoid the bar of limitation The trial court set aside the sale with respect to one-third share of the judgment-debtor-petitioner. The t












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