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

1949 Supreme(Cal) 102

G.N.DAS
Balaram Mandal – Appellant
Versus
Sahebjan Gazi – Respondent


Advocates:
Bholanath Roy - for Appellant.Chandra Sekhar Sen and J. Mujumdar, Government Pleader - for Government.

JUDGMENT :- This is a reference under S. 5, Court-fees Act and raises three questions for decision, viz., (1) whether one valuation should be put under S. 7(4)(c), Court-fees Act, subject to correction by the Court under S. 8(c), Court-fees Act; (2) where the defendant and not the plaintiff is before the Court, what is the procedure to be followed for valuing the relief and (3) whether S. 17(2), Court-fees Act as amended would apply to cases arising under S. 7(4)(c), Court-fees Act.

2. The substance of the plaint, as it appears from the report of the Stamp Reporter, is that the plaintiff brought the suit out of which the appeal arises on the allegation that the disputed property belonged to one Akazaddin and others. The plaintiff purchased the same by a registered deed of sale for a consideration of Rs. 1,000 from the said Akazaddin and others in the benami of his brother-in-law defendant 1. The plaintiff went into possession of the property purchased by him. Later on, defendant 1 sold the disputed property to defendant 2 who in collusion with defendants 3 and 4, is trying to dispossess the plaintiff from the disputed property. The plaintiff accordingly brought the suit for declara
















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