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

1924 Supreme(Cal) 106

MUKERJI
Krishna Kumar Deb – Appellant
Versus
Atul Chandra Ghose – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Mukerji, J. - The plaintiff instituted this suit against the defendants Nos. 1 to 10 as principal defendants and defendants Nos. 11 and 12 as pro forma defendants for declaration of right by purchase to a tank with an outlet comprising an area of 5 cattas and of right by inheritance to 1 catta of land and for confirmation of possession in respect of the said 5 cattas and for recovery of khas possession in respect of the said 1 catta and for an injunction.

2. The plaintiff's case was that he has acquired 3/4th share in the said tank by purchase, the remaining 3/4th share belonging to the defendant No. 12, and had also acquired title to the said 1 catta of land by inheritance and thereafter by partition with his brother the defendant No. 11. As for the tank, the allegation was that there was an outlet at its north-east corner from the time of the plaintiff's vendor, and the plaintiff closed the same for the purpose of rearing fish; that the defendants Nos. 1 to 9, at the instigation of the defendant No. 10, for themselves and also on behalf of the public, instituted a criminal case against the plaintiff, for getting the said outlet opened on the allegation that there was a pub

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