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

1932 Supreme(Cal) 189

RANKIN, SUHRAWARDY, PEARSON, MUKERJI, MALLIK, GUHA, GRAHAM, C. C. GHOSE, BUCKLAND
Krishna Pada Chatterjee – Appellant
Versus
Sm. Manada Sundari Ghose – Respondent


ORDER

Suhrawardy and Graham, JJ. - This case raises a difficult and controversial question which in the interest of the public should be finally decided. The facts which have given rise to the litigation are shortly these: One Jogneswar, the landlord of a certain holding, brought a suit for rent and obtained a decree against the tenants in 1922. In 1923 ho sold his interest in the ganti to Gopal Chatterjee. Subsequently Gopal obtained a decree for rent in Suit No. 1930 of 1924 against the tenants. The holding was sold in execution of Gopal's decree and after that decree was satisfied, the surplus sale proceeds to the extent of Rupees 710 odd was deposited in Court to the credit of the tenants. The holding was sold in execution of Gopal's decree on 21st April 1927, but before that date on 21st March 1927, the plaintiff purchased the right, title and interest of the tenants in the holding at a certificate sale under the Public Demands Recovery Act for recovery of settlement dues from the tenants. Subsequently the rent decree, obtained by Jogneswar against the tenants was put into execution by Jogneswar's heirs and the surplus sale proceeds in Court were attached in execution. The plai

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