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

1955 Supreme(Cal) 164

R.P.MOOKERJEE, P.N.MUKHERJEE
KAMALINI GHOSE CHOUDHURANI – Appellant
Versus
HIMANGSHU BHUSHAN GHOSE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Apurbadhan Mukherjee, DHRUBA MUKHERJI, KSHITINDRA KUMAR MITTER, NALIN CHANDRA BANERJI

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) SIX brothers Manmatha Nath Ghose, Promotha Nath Ghose, Sitikantha Ghose, Sudhangsu Bhusan Ghose, Himangshu Bhusan Ghose and Haridas Ghose owned in equal shares, each having an undivided one-sixth, several properties (including their residential house) at Barnia. In course of time, Pramatha, Sitikantha, Manmatha and Sudhangsu died, leaving respectively widow Charubala, widow Mrinalini, son Kaliprasanna and widow Unmadini and sons Biswanath, Debabrata, Subrata and Satinath, as their heirs and legal representatives, who, along with the two surviving co-sharers, Himangshu and Haridas, became entitled to the said properties, each branch having an undivided one-sixth share.

( 2 ) ON 18th Sraban 1351 B. S. , corresponding to 3-8-1944 the abovenamed heirs of Pramatha, Sitikantha, Manmatha and Sudhangshu sold their undivided one-sixth shares, totalling four-sixths or two-thirds, in the several properties, described in Schedule (Ka) of the present plaint and belonging to the above family, to the present defendants 1 and 2, Sm. Kamalini Ghosh Chowdhurani and Sm. Bani Ghosh Chowdhurani, for a total price of Rs. 7,999/. The sale purported to be an absolute sale and,










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