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

1976 Supreme(Cal) 159

A.K.SEN, M.N.RAO
CHHOTALAL HARIRAM – Appellant
Versus
DILIP KUMAR CHATTERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PARTHA DUTTA, RUMA PAL, S.K.KAPOOR

A. K. SEN, M. N. RAO

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale and raises a short but an important question for decision. The question so raised is as to whether such a suit abates on the death of the vendor defendant when his legal representative are not brought on record even though subsequent transferees from the vendor are already on record as parties defendants. The question so raised arises on the following facts.

( 2 ) ONE Kali Kinkar Chatterji (predecessor-in-interest of the present respondents) instituted the aforesaid suit for specific performance of a contract dated August 16, 1961 of sale against the vendor F. N. Gazdar in respect of premises No. 31, Benaras Road, Howrah (hereinafter referred to as the suit property ). While contesting the suit F. N. Gazdar sold the suit property on January 7, 1961 to two persons, Karamshi Walji Patel and Karsan Patel (hereinafter referred to as the Patels ). Patels on an application made by them had themselves added as parties' defendants in the suit.

( 3 ) PRINCIPAL defendants F. N. Gazdar died on April 7, 1964. On an application made on June 10, 1964, plaintiff Kali Kinkar substituted one












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