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

1950 Supreme(Ori) 74

JAGANNADHA DAS, PANIGRAHI
CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT BOARD AND ORS. – Appellant
Versus
C. H. ACHAYA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.SEN, S.MISRA, S.N.Sengupta

JAGANNADHA DAS, J.

( 1 ) THE defendants are the appellants in these two second appeals. They arise out of two suits O. S. 11/46 and O. S. 82/46 on the file of the District Munsif of puri tried analogously (simultaneously? ). The plaintiff and the defendants are the same in both the suits and they relate substantially to the same matter. There was a common judgment in both the suits and the appeals therefrom to the lover appellate Court were also heard analogously (simultaneously?) and dealt with by a common judgment. The suits had been decreed by the trial court and the said decrees were confirmed in appeal. Defendant 1 in both the suits who is appellant in these appeals is the Chairman, District Board of Puri, defendants 2 and 3 in both the suits who are appellants 2 and 3 before as are lessees from the District Board of a portion of plot No. 736 in Mouza Kudiara. Defendant 2 is a minor represented by his mother and guardian, defendant 3. That plot is a road side land abutting on the District Board road running from pipli to Khuria. The plantiff (respondent In both the appeals) is the present owner as has been found by the Courts below-of plot no. 787. He has started constructing




























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