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

1949 Supreme(Ori) 11

RAY, PANIGRAHI
UDAYANARAYAN PATI – Appellant
Versus
RADHASHYAM MANGARAJ MAHAPATRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.N.Das, G.B.MOHANTY, H.SEN

RAY, C. J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 are the appellants of whom defendant 3 is dead and the other defendants on record are his legal representatives. The plaintiff brought a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession under the following circumstances. The plaintiff is a cosharer landlord of the estate within the ambits of which the disputed holding lies. He instituted rent Suit No. 5633 of 1927-28 for recovery of his share of rent but impleaded 12 other cosharer landlords as pro forma defendants in order to constitute the suit in the form conformable to the provisions of Section 199 of the Orissa Tenancy Act. He obtained a decree and there is no dispute that the said decree was a rent decree and would carry the same effect as that obtained either by a sole landlord or the entire body of landlords for the total arrears of rent due in respect of the holding. As the holding, however, had been mortgaged to the appellants in the year 1914 and a suit for enforcement of the mortgage was instituted on 28th May 1927 being Original Suit (Mortgage) No. 232 of 1927, the mortgagee obtained a preliminary decree on 5th November 1927 and the same was made absolute on 17th November 192


















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