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

1956 Supreme(Cal) 50

GUHA RAY
JATA BHUSAN CHATTERJEE – Appellant
Versus
KRISHNA BHAMINI DEBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
LALA HEMANTA KUMAR, NIRMAL CHANDRA CHOUDHURI, RABIN MITRA

GUHA RAY, J.

( 1 ) THE facts out of which this appeal arises are not ill dispute. They are briefly as follows:

( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 Krishna Bhamini Debi, widow of late Bibhakar Chatterji, obtained a decree against respondent No. 2 Amal Krishna Chatterji, her step-son, in Title Suit No. 268 of 1945. The decree was modified on appeal and this decree, so modified, is in the following terms:"the appellant, namely, Krishna Bhamini Debi will recover past maintenance for three years at the rate of Rs. 10/- per month or Rs. 630/- in all. She will also get maintenance at the same rate since Jaistha, 1351 B. S. The amount of court-fees payable by the appellant in the two courts should be recoverable by the Government from the respondent No. 1 alone and will farm a first charge on the property left by Bibhnkar Chatterji. There will also be a" second charge on the one-third share of the plaint lands for the maintenance of the appellant". It is this last sentence of the decree with which we are concerned in this appeal. Krishna Bhamini filed an execution petition which was registered as Title Execution Case No. 120 of 1948 for realisation of arrears of maintenance from Jaislha, 1351 B. S. to












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