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

1960 Supreme(Cal) 177

S.C.LAHIRI, R.S.BACHAWAT, P.N.MUKHERJEE
BIBHAS MOHAN MUKHERJEE – Appellant
Versus
HARI CHARAN BANERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Purnendu Sekhar Basu, Shyam Pada Choudhary, SUNIL KUMAR GHOSE

LAHIRI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS reference arises out of an appeal from original decree filed by the plaintiffs against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge under Section 8-B (3) of the Court-fees Act. The facts leading up to this reference have been summarised in the order of reference and they are as follows :

( 2 ) THE suit out of which this reference arises was one for a declaration that a certain preliminary decree is a suit for partition passed on compromise was invalid, inoperative and fraudulent and for certain other reliefs one of which was for a new preliminary decree. Initially the plaintiffs treated the reliefs claimed by them as for partition only and paid a court-fee stamp of Rs. 15/- upon the plaint. On the objection ot the Court, however, the plaintiffs put in an additional court-fee stamp of Rs. 20/-- This court-tee was tentatively accepted by the Court as sufficient subject to any objection that might be raised by the defendants. After the defendants had entered appearance in the suit, they raised a point as to the sufficiency of court-fees paid by the plaintiffs and upon that objection a preliminary issue was framed to the following effect : "is the court-fee paid s



















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