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

1966 Supreme(Cal) 182

B.MUKERJI
ABDUL HAMID – Appellant
Versus
DURGA CHARAN DAS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Bijan Bihari Das Gupta, JHANENDRANATH BAKSHI

B. MUKHERJI, J.

( 1 ) IF two of the five appellants die during the pendency of their appeal arising out of a suit instituted by them for recovery of Khas possession of a certain plot of land, reckoning the sole defendant as a trespasser thereon, and if the appeal against the two dead appellants abates, no steps having been taken for substitution of their legal representatives, will the appeal as a whole abate? That is the main question debated in this revisional application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code 5 of 1908 at the instance of the three surviving plaintiffs appellants. The learned Subordinate Judge, seized of such appeal, holds, the appeal as a whole abates. Mr Bijan Behari Das Gupta, appearing for the appellants petitioners, submits, it does not. Mr. Jnanendra Nath Bakshi, appearing for the respondent opposite party, contends for the view taken by the learned Subordinate Judge.

( 2 ) THE facts which have led up to this revisional petition need not be referred to further than as follows: the land in controversy is plot No. 952 under Khatian No. 581 of mouza Maheshmati within the jurisdiction of Englishbazar Municipality and police station: Englishbazar being










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