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

1993 Supreme(Cal) 395

S.C.SEN, ARUN KUMAR DUTTA
MONORANJAN MAHAPATRA – Appellant
Versus
BASANTA KUMAR MAHAPATRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AJIT KUMAR SAHA, Subir Kumar Bhattacharjee, TAPAN KUMAR MUKHERJEE

A. K. DUTTA, J.

( 1 ) -WE have heard the appeal with consent of the learned Advocates for the contending parties.

( 2 ) THE instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12. 3. 92 passed by Paritosh Kumar Mukherjoe, J. in CO. No. 11142 (W) of 1990 on the writ petition filed by the Respondents Nos. 1 to 6 herein for quashing the order dated 8. 8. 90 passed by the Collector, L. R. al Midnapore, in L. R. A. Case No. 12 of 1989 before him on the grounds made out therein.

( 3 ) THE facts as are relevant for the present purpose may shortly be stated as follows :

( 4 ) ONE Jagadish Chandra Khatua was, undeniably, the recorded tenant in respect of plot Nos. 2239 and 134, measuring 0. 48 and 0. 24 decimals of land respectively, within Mouza Kultha, J. L. No. 8 of Khejuri, Post and District-Midanpore (hereinafter referred to as disputed plots), whose name had been recorded during the Survey Operation under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act. The said Jagadish had transferred the same in favour of his son Aswini Kumar Khatua under a registered Deed of Nirapan on 6. 1. 54. The said Aswini had transferred the disputed plot No. 2239 to Ashim Kumar Mondal and others by a











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