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

1991 Supreme(Cal) 102

AMULYA KUMAR NANDI
ASHIM RANJAN DAS – Appellant
Versus
BIMALA GHOSH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMITAVA PAIN, JYOTIRMOY BHATTACHARYA

A. K. NANDI, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is directed against the judgment and order passed in Misc. Appeal No. 512 of 1989 by the 10th Court of the Additional District Judge, Alipore. The plaintiffs filed a suit for injunction. The disputed property belongs to four brothers, namely, Hrishikesh, Rash Behari, Bibhuti and Nanilal. Hrishikesh purchased 1/5th share of Nanilal by virtue of a deed dated 21. 1. 69. Hrishikesh died on 10. 4. 75 leaving behind him the plaintiff's in the suit as his legal heirs and successors. Rashbebari died leaving four sons and two daughters. Bibhuti Ghosh is alive. The disputed property is an undivided family dwelling house of the plaintiffs and other co-sharers. Bibhuti transferred his interest by virtue of an Indenture of lease dated 19. 6. 89 in favour of the defendant - Dream Land Apartments. Similarly, the heirs of Rashbehari transferred their interest by virtue of a deed of lease on the same date in favour of the defendant. Both these deeds were intended to lease out the shares of those co-sharer for a period of 999 years. About a month before this long term lease a monthly tenancy was created in favour of the lessee and possession of the leasehold prop







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