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

2011 Supreme(Cal) 7

PRASENJIT MANDAL
Honeypath Construction – Appellant
Versus
Kishore Das – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Bibhas Kumar Majumder, Md. Majnu Sk, Chandra Sekhar Das, S. Gangopadhyay

JUDGMENT

PRASENJIT MANDAL, J.

1. THIS application is at the instance of the plaintiffs and is directed against the order no.99 dated August 26, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court, Barasat, District North 24 Parganas in Title Suit No.3 of 1999 thereby rejecting an application under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs.

2. THE short fact is that the plaintiffs/petitioners herein instituted a Title Suit No.3 of 1999 for specific performance of contract, permanent injunction and other reliefs against the defendants/opposite parties herein in respect of the property as described in the schedule of the plaint. THE suit was at the stage of recording evidence and in that suit, the plaintiff no.1 deposed on behalf of all the plaintiff. Subsequently, the plaintiff no.3 tendered evidence under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for marking a copy of a document dated December 13, 1997 as exhibit as secondary evidence. THE prayer for adducing evidence by the plaintiff no.3 has been rejected by the impugned order. At the same time, the learned Trial Judge has also closed the evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs. Bei




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