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

1964 Supreme(Ori) 68

G.K.MISRA
CHANDU AGASTI – Appellant
Versus
CHANDRABALI KALAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.RAO, M.K.C.RAO, M.S.Rao, RANJIT MOHANTY

G. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2 are the appellants against a confirming judgment. Plaintiff no. 1 and defendant No. 3 are brothers. Plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 are sons of plaintiff no. 1. The suit is for redemption on the allegation that the plaintiffs and defendant no. 3 executed a mortgage bond Ext. A dated 15-6-1935 for Rs. 200/- in favour of the father of defendants 1 and 2. The mortgagees were put in possession and under Section 17 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act the mortgage has been automatically discharged. There was an allegation in the plaint by way of amendment that defendant No. 3 transferred a portion of the suit property (It relates to item 2 of the schedule) in favour of defendant No. 4. The schedule given in the plaint contains two items not numbered. The dimension of the first item is 35 cubits x 20 cubits, and the dimension of the second item is 30 cubits x 20 cubits. For purpose of convenience these would be described in the judgment hereinafter as items 1 an 2.

( 2 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2 contested the suit and averred that Ext. A is a sale and not a mortgage. They further stated that item No. 1 of the plaint schedule was purchased by one Baidyanath Banerji









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