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

1952 Supreme(Cal) 207

CHAKRABARTI, SINHA
TARAPADA GHOSE – Appellant
Versus
SAILENDRA NATH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
NAND GOPAL BANERJI, RABINDRA NATH BHATTACHARJI, SUNIL KUMAR MITRA

CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THERE seems to have been misconception in this case on the part of all parties. The plaintiffs brought a suit in which they prayed for a large variety of reliefs, the chief of which, are construction of a will, declaration of their title to certain movable and immovable properties, partition of the said properties, accounts and appointment of a receiver, pending the final determination of the suit. The above is only a broad summary of the large multitude of reliefs which have been crowded into the prayer portion of the plaint, but they give a fairly accurate idea of the lines along which the plaintiffs desired the Court to relieve them. The suit was valued for the purpose of jurisdiction at Rs. 55173-3-9 but for the purposes of court-fees the plaintiffs adopted a method which one thought was no longer surviving. They took the reliefs on construction of the will, declaration, accounts and the appointment of a receiver separately, valued each relief at Rs. 500/- and paid a sum of Rs. 187-8-0 upon the total amount of Rs. 2000/-which, according to them, was the total value of the four reliefs. In addition they also paid the fixed court-fee of Rs. 15/- for the







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