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

1964 Supreme(Cal) 29

P.B.MUKHARJI
RABI NARAYAN UPADHYAYA – Appellant
Versus
KANAK PROVA DEBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amar Nath Roy Choudhury, Priya Nath Bhattacharyya

P. B. MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) THE only point of law in this Second Appeal is how tar a father as the natural guardian of a Hindu minor son has power to sell the minor's estate for the benefit of the estate.

( 2 ) THE point of law arises on the following facts: The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of khas possession of the lands in suit and declaration or her title thereto in respect of 10 bighas of land in Taluk Debgram in the district of Jalpaiguri. She filed the suit on the strength of her title by purchase on the basis of a registered deed of sale dated 21st Febuary, 1945 executed by Mahipal Singh Roy, the natural guardian and father of minor Birendra Kanta Roy who was the owner of the lands in suit. The plaintiffs case is that she was in possession since the purchase but was dispossessed by the defendant appellant on or about the middle of Baisakh 1360 B. S. which will be about 10 years ago, i. e. , about April 1933. She then instituted the suit on the 7th April, 1956.

( 3 ) THE defence is that the defendants bought these self-same lands from Birendra Kanta Hoy when he attained majority and the sale on which the defendants relied was also a registered deed dated the 21st Decem








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