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

1918 Supreme(Cal) 520

SMITHER, FLETCHER
Ram Nath Ojah – Appellant
Versus
Natabar Maiti – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge of Midnapur, dated the 19th June 1916, affirming the decision of the Munsif of Contai. The plaintiff sued for confirmation of possession on declaration of title. The dispute really is as to whether this land forms a portion of the plaintiff's nispe or the defendant's nispe. The first Court went into the matter both of possession and on the question of title, and if those matters had been considered by the learned Judge of the lower Appellate Court, there would not have been much to say against his judgment. But what the learned Judge has done in this case is that he has neglected the question of possession altogether. He has not come to any conclusion one way or the other as to who is in possession of the land, and on the question of title he says that it is not proved, solely on the ground that the appellant's Pleader asked for a local enquiry to establish the identity of the land in dispute within certain days A judgment founded on those particulars without really going into the question either of possession or of title is one that cannot stand. The decree of the lower Appe

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