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

2019 Supreme(Gau) 747

PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
Rupali Naug – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar Bajaj – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B. Malakar, Adv., A. Barik, Adv., N. Dhar, Adv., D. Chakraborty, Adv., C. Charkraborty, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Prasanta Kumar Deka, J.

Heard Mr. N Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D Chakraborty, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. C. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondent No. 9.

2. The petitioner filed T.S. No. 331/2010 in the court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati. The suit was filed against the respondent No. 1 and its authorised agent. The suit was for permanent injunction. It is the claim of the plaintiff petitioner that the land she is possessing is the ceiling surplus land acquired from the defendant No. 1 Company. On the strength of possession and subsequent alleged khatian to Mr. Girindra Biswas and Mohitosh Nandi, the petitioner made separate arrangement with them and was possessing the suit land carrying out business thereon. Advocate notice was issued to the plaintiff petitioner for vacating the suit land following which the suit was filed against the defendant respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the said defendants respondents from entering into the suit land and interfering with the possession. Along with the said suit an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC was

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