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

1979 Supreme(Cal) 164

RAM KRISHNA SHARMA, MURARI MOHAN DUTT
ANNAPURNA CHATTERJEE – Appellant
Versus
SABITA GUHA AND ORS. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BHUPENDRA KUMAR PANDA, J.C.DUTT, MRINAL KANTI ROY, N.C.ROY CHAUDHARY, RATHINDRA KUMAR DE

M. M. DUTT, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule is at the instance of the plaintiff and it is directed against order No. 18 dated June 27, 1978 of the Additional District Judge, 7th Court, Alipore. By the said order, the learned Additional District Judge dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for the restoration of the appeal dismissed for non-prosecution.

( 2 ) THE predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner filed a suit for partition being Title Suit No. 54 of 1963 in the 7th Court of the Subordinate Judge, Alipore, for partition by metes and bounds of the disputed property. The said suit was valued at Rs. 8,000/ -. A preliminary decree was passed on April 11, 1963. Thereafter, a Commissioner for partition was appointed. He submitted his report on June 29, 1970. The final decree was passed on May 26, 1971 on the basis of the Commissioner's report. In the final decree, it was stated that the suit was valued at Rs. 24,000/ -. That was obviously a mistake. The petitioner, however, was misled by the said statement in the final decree as to the value of the suit. Accordingly, he filed two appeals, one in the court of the Additional District



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