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

1976 Supreme(Cal) 284

SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE, SALIL KUMAR DATTA
Hamuda Khatoon – Appellant
Versus
BENIYAN BIBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASIM BANERJEE, BIMAL JYOTSNA CHATTERJI, MALAY KUMAR BASU

SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS matter has been referred under Chapter VII, Rule 2 of the Appellate Side Rules to a larger Bench by a Division Bench consisting of Mr. Justice A, C. Gupta and Mr. Justice S. C. Deb for a decision on the following question: is an order rejecting the memorandum of appeal following the rejection of application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal a decree ?

( 2 ) IN the instant case, the proposed appeal to the first appellate Court, namely, the Court of the District Judge, was barred by limitation. An application was made under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay and the memorandum of appeal was sought to be filed along with the application. The application under Section 5 was rejected. It also appears that an order was made rejecting the memorandum of appeal. The question is whether the order rejecting the memorandum following the rejection of the application under Section 5 is a decree.

( 3 ) THE referring Bench has noted a few conflicting decisions of this Court. In Sudhansu Bhusan Pandey v. Majhe Bibi, reported in (1938) 42 Cal WN 72 Mr. Justice Biswas expressed a tentat








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