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

2003 Supreme(Cal) 56

PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY
MD. AKHTAR HOSSAIN – Appellant
Versus
SURESH SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMITAVA PAIN

PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY, J.

( 1 ) THIS Second Appeal arises out of the decision of the learned Assistant District Judge; Frist Court at Howrah in Title Appeal No. 169 of 1990 passed on 23rd Dec. 1993 affirming the order dated 8th May, 1990 passed by the learned Munsif, second Court at Howrah in Title Suit No. 86 of 1990.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff brought the aforesaid title Suit being T. S. No. 86 of 1990 on 4th april. 1990 for a declaration that the decree passed earlier in Title Suit No. 87 of 1968 and Title Appeal No. 209 of 1969 passed on 16-11-1970 are mala fide, fraudulent, inoperative and are not binding upon the plaintiff and also for permanent injunction against the defendants restraining the said defendants from ousting the plaintiff from the suit premises in any way and taking possession thereof by execution in T. Ex. No. 19 of 1970 or by any other execution.

( 3 ) ). Admittedly, prior to the aforesaid Title Suit No. 86 of 1990 the plaintiff instituted another suit being Title Suit No. 373 of 1970 for identical relief.

( 4 ) ). It appears from the records that on 7-12-1970 learned Munsif on perusal of the said plaint in Title Suit No. 373 of 1970 and petition filed in co





































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