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

1960 Supreme(Cal) 187

P.CHATTERJEE
BHUBAN CHANDRA SADHUKHAN – Appellant
Versus
BISWANATH DEY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ABINASH CHANDRA BHATTACHARYYA, GANGANARAYAN CHANDRA

P. CHATTERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a second appeal arising out of an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is on behalf of the judgment-debtor. The objection of the Judgment-debtor was that the notarial bond, grosses cony of which was obtained on 30th January, 1952, is not directly executable. The answer of the decree-holder is that it is so executable and the judgment-debtor not having taken the objection in question in an earlier objection under Section 47 of the Code cannot now raise the objection and it is barred by the doctrine of constructive res judicata. The Munsiff held that it was not necessary for him to go into the merits of the objection but he held that this objection was barred by the principle of constructive res judicata. Against that there was an appeal. The Subordinate Judge held that the previous miscellaneous case No. 54/58 was dismissed for default for non-appearance of both Parties on the date of heaing. The learned Judge held that under Order 9, Rule 4 of the Code, if a suit was dismissed for default of both the Parties, there would be no bar to subsequent suit. The learned Subordinate Judge thereafter considered the merits of the objec















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