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

1910 Supreme(Cal) 275

Satish Chunder Bhuttacharya – Appellant
Versus
Satya Churn Majumdar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. Both the lower Courts have dismissed the Plaintiff's suit on the ground that it was not maintainable. The Plaintiff sought to obtain a decree declaring his title to the three plots in the schedule and for a declaration that the Defendant had acquired no right to the properties in virtue of the rent decrees he had recovered against the Plaintiff's tenants.

2. In the opinion of the lower Courts, the Plaintiff should have included a prayer for recovery of possession, and, further, the lower Appellate Court refused to allow him to amend the plaint because there had been considerable delay in applying for that purpose.

3. In second appeal, the contentions raised are three in number; first, that the Plaintiff's suit was maintainable on a right construction of sec. 42 of the Specific Relief Act; secondly, that, at any rate, the amendment of the plaint prayed for should have been allowed, and, thirdly, that, in any event, the suit can proceed with regard to the third plot as to which the Defendant has not recovered any rent decree against the tenant thereof.

4. A number of cases have been cited; but, before dealing with three of the cases which appear to be on the point, we may obs

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