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

1993 Supreme(Cal) 244

TARUN CHATTERJEE
MINOR SUBIR RANJAN MONDAL – Appellant
Versus
SITA NATH MUKHERJEE – Respondent


TARUN CHATTERJEE, J.


( 1 ) WHETHER S. 5 of the Limitation Act is applicable to an 'application' u/s. 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is the question that needs to be decided in the aforesaid six Revisional Applications. Initially C. O. Nos. 3598 and 3599 of 1991, C. O. No. 3615 of 1991 and C. O. No. 852 of 1991 were heard by me at length and the judgments were reserved. Subsequently, two other revisional applications, namely, C. R. Nos. 2992 and 2993 of 1986, came up for hearing before me in which the same. question was involved.

( 2 ) THE learned lawyers, appearing for the respective parties in the subsequent two revisional applications, wanted to argue the said two revisional applications and for that reason, I had to hear them as well. In order to give opportunities to the learned lawyers, appearing for the parties in the subsequent two revisional applications, I had to reserve my judgments of the other four revisional applications which were heard earlier. C. R. Nos. 2992 and 2993 of 1986 were heard separately and by a common judgment, all the aforesaid Revisional Applications are being disposed of. Since in all the revisional





























































































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