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

1922 Supreme(Cal) 426

GHOSE, CHOTZNER
Aran Sardar – Appellant
Versus
Hara Sundar Majumdar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. We are invited in this Rule, which was obtained u/s 107 of the Government of India Act, to quash certain proceedings initiated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Manikganj u/s 145, Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The question in controversy lies within a very narrow compass. There was a proceeding u/s 145, Criminal Procedure Code, between the first party and' persons now represented by the second party which resulted in an order being made in favour of the first party on the 29th of August 1919 declaring such party to be entitled to retain possession until evicted in due course of law and forbidding all disturbance of such possession until such eviction. The principal person of the second party then was one U.N. Roy. The interest of U.N. Roy has now passed to one Hara Sundar Mazumdar and, he is now the principal person among the second party. It appears that after Hara Sundar acquired his interest he began to disturb the possession of the first party, which was maintained by the order of the 29th of August 1919. There is no dispute as to the identity of the parties. There was a question whether the present -dispute related to the same land which was the subject-matter of dis

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