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

2015 Supreme(Gau) 833

A.K.GOSWAMI
SUNIL KUMAR SAHA ON HIS DEATH HIS LEGAL HEIRS SRI RAJ KUMAR SAHA – Appellant
Versus
TAPASI SARKAR – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. P. K. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants on the admission of the appeals under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC.

2. These Second Appeals, numbered as RSA 176/2015 and RSA 177/2015 are preferred by the defendant No. 2 of the suits against the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2014, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Barpeta, in Title Appeal No. 30/2011 and Title Appeal No. 31/2011 arising out of the common judgment dated 09.05.2011, and decree dated 16.05.2011, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Barpeta, in Title Suit No. 351/2007 and Title Suit No. 8/2008. Title Suit No. 351/2007 was filed by one Mitali Das and Title Suit No. 8/2008 was filed by one Smt. Tapasi Sarkar, both being sisters of defendant No. 1 in both the suits, Prasenjit Das, who is no more. Plaintiffs and defendant No. 1 in the suits are daughters and son, respectively, of Prasanta Kumar Das.

3. In Title Suit No. 351/2007, the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 8/2008 is arrayed as pro forma defendant No. 18, and the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 351/2007 is arrayed as pro forma defendant No. 18 in Title Suit No. 8/2008.

4. Mr. Deka, learned counsel has submitted that almost identical averments have been made i






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