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

1938 Supreme(Cal) 89

S. K. GHOSE, PATTERSON
Guruprasad Sukul – Appellant
Versus
Tarini Charan Debnath – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.K. Ghose, J. - This is a second appeal by defendants 14 and 15 who are called the Sukul defendants. It appears that one Brshad Ali mortgaged the suit land and other lands to the plaintiffs in 1905. The plaintiffs brought a suit upon the mortgage on 20th April 1918 and got a decree on 5th February 1921 for Rs. 778. In execution of the mortgage, the plaintiffs purchased the property on 25th July 1921 and obtained delivery of possession on 13th January 1922. The land was then in occupation of certain bargadars of the present appellants. They brought suit against the plaintiffs u/s 9, Specific Belief Act, and obtained a decree and dispossessed the plaintiffs on 17th March 1923. The pre-sent appellants are subsequent mortgagees, having taken a mortgage from Ershad Ali in 1907. They were not made parties to the mortgage suit brought by the plaintiffs. It is not also disputed that one of the daughters of Ershad called Tunia's mother was not impleaded in the plaintiffs' mortgage suit. The present appellants brought a suit upon their mortgage on 20th August 1919. They got a decree on 26th November 1919 and in execution thereof purchased the property on 21st April 1920 and obtained

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