Back
KESANG DOMA BHUTIA
Twilight Properties Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Supratik Bhattacharjee – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Kesang Doma Bhutia, J. - The plaintiffs/petitioners have filed the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 2nd Court, Alipore, in Title Suit No. 10216 of 2011 on 20.03.2021 and whereby the learned Court below was pleased to recast issues in compliance of the direction of the Hon'ble Co-ordinate bench of this Hon'ble High Court passed in C.O. No. 4188 of 2018 on 13.11.2019 and kept in abeyance the plaintiffs' application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code.
2. The facts necessary for determination of the present revisional application in gist is that there exist a dispute between the parties in respect of a Development Project of a property measuring 3 bigas 12 cottahs 7 chittacks &18 sq.ft. situated at 3/1 Sunny Park, Ballygunge, Kolkata- 700019. Such property was originally owned by one Josna Ghosal. The said Josna Ghosal during his life time relinquished the suit property in favour of his grandson Jitendra Kumar Ghosal by executing a deed of transfer on 6th July, 1971. Jitendra Kumar Ghosal was a NRI (Non Resident Indian) and married to an American lady nam
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party to a suit is entitled to seek production of documents in the custody of the opposing party to prove their alternative remedy for damag....
Trial court justified in striking out defence under Order XI Rule 21 CPC for willful non-compliance with unchallenged order to produce pleaded documents on oath.
The court upheld the trial Court's dismissal of applications to introduce documents due to lack of valid grounds for delay, affirming the importance of timely evidence submission under procedural rul....
The grounds for rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC cannot be examined at the stage of defendant's evidence and go into the merits of the suit, which should be decided during the....
The court established that procedural delays should not prevent the introduction of relevant evidence, prioritizing substantial justice.
The appellate court may only admit additional evidence under specific conditions, which were not met by the petitioners, as they failed to demonstrate due diligence in producing the evidence during t....
Appellate court cannot admit additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC absent due diligence proof or necessity for judgment; must record reasons; erroneous allowance despite negligence and delay....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
