Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1949 Supreme(Cal) 225

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
HARRIES,BANERJEE, JJ.
Kedar Nath Mukherjee
Versus
Iswar Kalimata of Kalighat
F.C. Appeal No. 15 of 1949
Decided On : 20-12-1949

Advocates:
Hiralal Chakravarty and Saroj Kumar Maity - for Appellants.
Pannalal Chatterjee - for Deputy Registrar and Respondent 1.
Nagendra Kumur Dutt, Satya Charan Pyne, Ajoy Kumar Bose, Nalini Ranjan Bhattacharjya and Subodh Chandra Basak - for Respondents.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of appellants to a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C. when the decree of the Court is found to be a variation of the decree of the Court below.

Headnote:
Certificate - Appeal - The court granted a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C. as the decree of the Court was found to be a variation of the decree of the Court below.
Fact of the Case:

The appeal was allowed in part and portion of the decree of the trial Court was vacated. The value of the suit and the value of the appeal exceed Rs. 10,000.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the decree of this Court is not a decree of affirmance but is a decree varying the decree of the Court below, entitling the appellants to a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C.
Issues: Value of the suit and appeal, nature of the decree of the Court
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the nature of the decree and the entitlement of the appellants to a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C.
Final Decision: The court granted leave to appeal and a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C. Costs of the application were to be costs in the appeal.

Judgement

HARRIES, C.J. :-In this case it is conceded that the value of the suit and the value of the appeal exceed Rs. 10,000. The appeal was allowed in part and portion of the decree of the trial Court was vacated.

2. In these circumstances it appears to us; that the decree of this Court is not a decree of affirmance but is a decree varying the decree of the Court below. That being so the appellants are entitled as of right to a certificate and accordingly we grant leave to appeal and grant as certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C.

3. Costs of this application will be costs in the appeal the hearing fee being assessed at two gold mohurs. 4. Let the supplementary affidavit filed in Court today be kept on the record.

BANERJEE, J. :- I agree.

Leave granted.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

1949 Supreme(Cal) 225

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTAHARRIES,BANERJEE, JJ.Kedar Nath MukherjeeVersusIswar Kalimata of KalighatF.C. Appeal No. 15 of 1949Decided On : 20-12-1949

The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of appellants to a certificate under S. 110, Civil P.C. when the decree of the Court is found to be a variation of the decree of the Court below.

Judicial Analysis

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
HARRIES,BANERJEE, JJ.
Kedar Nath Mukherjee
Versus
Iswar Kalimata of Kalighat
F.C. Appeal No. 15 of 1949
Decided On : 20-12-1949