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

1938 Supreme(Cal) 305

SEN
Mon Mohan Bhattacharjee – Appellant
Versus
Bidhu Bhusan Dutta – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sen, J. - These are three appeals by some of the defendants in three suits for the declaration of the plaintiffs' title to certain plots of land and for ancillary reliefs. The suits were numbered 949, 950 and 951 of 1934 and were tried together by the Munsif, Second Court, Krishnagar, who decreed them in favour of the plain, tiffs. On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge upheld the decision of the trial Court making certain modifications in the decree passed with respect to Suit No. 949 of 1934. The defendants have now appealed to this Court. The appeals were taken up for hearing together and this judgment shall govern the three appeals. At the outset learned advocate for the appellants stated that he could not press the appeals arising out of suits numbered 949 and 950. They are Second Appeals Nos. 266' and 268 respectively. These appeals are accordingly dismissed with costs in favour of the appearing respondents.

2. In Suit No. 951 of 1934 out of which Second Appeal No. 267 arises the plaintiff's case briefly is as follows: There were two cousins Hari Mohan and Hari Nath who had an eight annas share each in certain property which they had inherited from their ancestors. T

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