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

1959 Supreme(Cal) 248

NIYOGI, P.N.MUKHERJEE
PROVA RANI ADHIKARI – Appellant
Versus
LALIT MOHINI MITRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
APURBADHAN MUKHERJI, Bijan Bihari Das Gupta, GOUR CHANDRA BISWAS, KANAN KUMAR GHOSH, PROVASH CHANDRA MUKHERJI

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is the plaintitf's appeal, arising out of suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession and damages. The suit was decreed by the trial court, but that decision was reversed by the learned lower appellate court and the plaintiffs suit was dismissed. Aggrieved by that decision, the present appeal was filed by the plaintiff.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts lie within a short compass and they may be stated as follows: the property in suit originally belonged to one Arun Chandra Dutta. By a Kobala, dated 4-10-1950, the plaintiff claims to have purchased the property and, thereafter, on 4-5-1954, she brought the present suit for recovery of possession of the disputed property from the defendant, on the allegations, inter alia, that the defendant was in occupation of the same without any title whatsoever and that the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration of title and also to recovery of possession as against her. In the meantime, there were some proceedings between the parties, to which reference will be made in due course in course of this judgment.

( 3 ) THE principal defence was one under Section 53a of the Transfer of Property Act and the defend




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