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

2006 Supreme(Cal) 393

ARUN KUMAR BHATTACHARYA
ASHISH @ PIKLU DAS – Appellant
Versus
DEBABRATA ACHARYA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARNAB ROY, Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, Sambhu Nath Sardar, Sarajit Sen, SHILA SARKAR

Arun Kumar Bhattacharya

( 1 ) THE hearing stems from an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner praying for revision of the order dated 28. 06. 2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Second Court, Maldah in Misc. Appeal 26/2003 setting aside the order being No. 8 dated 28. 10. 2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), First Court, Maldah in O. C. Suit No. 141/03.

( 2 ) THE circumstances leading to the above application are that the petitioner's father Bibhuti Bhusan Das and his two brothers Bhupati Bhusan das and Manindra Mohan Das were joint owners of 1/3rd share each of a bastu land appertaining to R. S. Plot No. 1389, Khatian No. 341, Mouza Phulbari, P. S. English Bazar, Maldah, as described in schedule 'ka'. Bhupati died leaving behind four sons. The land was partitioned amongst Bibhuti, Manindra and the said legal heirs of Bhupati by a registered deed of partition dated 27. 2. 91, and 0330 sahasrangsha, as described in schedule 'kha', fell in the share of Bibhuti who constructed a dwelling house thereon and gifted 100 sahasrangsha each to his two sons i. e. the petitioner and Pro-O. P. No. 2 by two deeds dated







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