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

1993 Supreme(Cal) 507

SAMIR KUMAR MOOKHERJEE, RABIN BHATTACHARYYA
Sahid Ali – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Kasem – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
S.P. Roy Chowdhury, A.K. Rakshit for the Petitioner.
Sasthi Charan Roy for the Opposite Parties.

ORDER

1. These two Revisional applications raise a short point of law, which has been referred to along with the case itself, before a Division Bench, by a learned single Judge. The said point of law in substance is whether on failure of the pre-emptor to deposit the consideration amount in full, as mentioned in the documents of transfer, simultaneously with the application for pre-emption, in the Court of the learned Munsif, the application deserves to be dismissed.

2. The trial Court allowed the pre-emption applications after holding that the pre-emptors were required to further deposit Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) with regard to each of the two applications within the times specified by the trial Court. On appeal, however, the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Howrah, set aside the said order of the learned Munsif and dismissed the applications for pre-emption upon a view that the pre-emptors were statutorily required to deposit simultaneously the entire amounts of the consideration, as mentioned in the documents of transfer. The present Revisional applications have been preferred on behalf of the pre-emptors, challenging the said order of the learned Addi








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