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

1953 Supreme(Cal) 23

K.C.CHUNDER
SURENDRA NATH – Appellant
Versus
TARASASHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Jitendra Nath Ghose, MANINDRA NATH GHOSH

K. C. CHUNDER, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against an appellate judgment of the Special Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, affirming that of the Judge, 6th Bench. It appears that an ejectment order was passed by the Small Cause Court Judge. An appeal was filed to the Special Bench. It appears and cannot be contested from the papers on record that at the time when this ejectment decree was passed a formal decree as required under the Code of Civil Procedure in the form prescribed thereunder was not drawn up in that Court. Indeed, till the High Court pointed out that a formal decree was necessary in view of the changes introduced by the Rent Control Act that the question of filing a decree ever arose. Indeed, in the present case, the so called decree on record is what has been always known in the court of Small Causes, Calcutta as an after-judgment statement and as it appears that there was never the practice of filing an after judgment statement in any appeal in the Calcutta Court of Small Causes following the usual practice none such was filed. Having been told by this court the learned Judges of the Special Bench, it seems, blamed the poor lawyers of the court

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