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

2002 Supreme(Cal) 586

Tarun Chatterjee, MAHEMMAD HABEEB SHAMS ANSARI, Asit Kumar Bisi
Sk. Sarafat Ali – Appellant
Versus
Hossain Ali Molla – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Bhaskar Ghosh, Bimal Kumar Chatterjee for the appellants in C.O. No. 2041 of 1995;
M.M. Verma, Neelam Verma, Poonam Verma for the respondents in C.O. No. 2041 of 1995;
Asit Kumar Bhattacharyya(3) for the appellants in C. O. No.8 of 1991;
Asit Kumar Bhattacharyya(3) for the appellants in C. O. Nos. 148-150 of 1991:
Tarit Kumar Bhattacharyya for the opposite party in C. O. No. 586 of 1997;
Asit Kumar Bhattacharyya(3) for the appellants in C. O. No. 722 of 1993;
B. Ganguly, G. Ghosh for the opposite party in C. O. No. 722 of 1993;
S. S. Arefin for the petitioner C. O. No. 1424 of 1995;
M. Ahmed, A. B. Ghosh for the opposite party in C. O. No. 1424 of 1995;
M. Ahmed. A. B. Ghosh, S. Roychowdhury for the opposite party in C. O. No. 918 of 1994.

JUDGMENT

Tarun Chatterjee, J.: These are ten Revision Cases referred to this Special Bench by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court. The point which induced a Division Bench of this Court to refer to this Bench is whether a substantive right conferred upon a co-sharer in a portion or share of a holding of a raiyat to exercise the right of pre-emption had been taken away by deletion of the words 'and treated as a unit for assessment of revenue' from the definition of "holding" in section 2 of sub-section (6) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act after the words 'means the land held by a raiyat'. On this question a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Damayanti Maity vs. Aswini Kumar Jana, 1990(2) CLJ 378, held that in view of deletion of the words 'and treated as a unit for assessment of revenue' an application by a co-sharer of such a holding was no longer maintainable in law. This question again cropped up before another Division Bench of this Court, which however, expressed its dissent and directed that the matters appearing before the said Division Bench on the aforesaid question, be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench to decide the ques













































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