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

1952 Supreme(Cal) 128

K.C.DAS GUPTA, LAHIRI
PROBHAT KUMAR CHATTERJEE – Appellant
Versus
LATIKA DEBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BENOY KRISHNA GHOSE, BINAYAK NATH BANERJEE, MIHIR KUMAR SARKAR, PARITOSH SARKAR, SUDHIR KUMAR ACHARYA, SUSHIL KR.BISWAS

K. C. DAS GUPTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, 24-Parganas, dismissing an application under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil P. C. Ths application was filed by two persons, Provat Kumar Chatterji and Krishna Kumar Chatterji, both minors. The decree which was sought to be set aside was passed in a suit brought by their father's brother's widow Latika Debi for partition, for return of certain ornaments and for accounts as a pauper. Both Krishna and Provat were impleaded in that suit as major persons and so there was no arrangement, for their representation through any guardian. The learned Subordinate Judge gave as the main reason of dismissing the application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure his conclusion being that in law these two petitioners could not be regarded as parties to the suit and consequently the decree was a nullity.

( 2 ) IT has been contended before us that when the parties were, in fact, impleaded as defendants, the omission to describe them as minor did not affect the fact that they were defendants and that there was really a duty en Court to arrange for their representation.

( 3 ) WHATEVER might


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