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

1996 Supreme(Ori) 126

DIPAK MISRA
SATYANANDA SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
RATIKANTA PANDA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASHOK MUKHERJI, S.PANDA

DEEPAK MISRA, J.


( 1 ) BEING aggrieved by the order dated 12-7-95 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) First Court, Cuttack in Title Suit No. 220 of 1995 whereby the said trial Judge accepted the suit as maintainable and declined to deal with the point of maintainability as envisaged under O. 7, R. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner has approached this Court in the present revision.

( 2 ) THE opposite party as plaintiff instituted the suit in the court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) First Court, Cuttack with a number of prayers which are as follows :-" (A) For a declaration that all the gold ornaments found in the locker No. 113 on 4-9-91 when the same was broken open belong to plaintiff. (b) For a direction to defendant No. 1 to deliver the gold ornaments to the plaintiff on payment of locker hire charges from January, 1985 till date of delivery of the ornaments to the plaintiff. (c)Permanently restraining defendant No. 4 from claiming the said gold ornaments. (d) Any other relief or reliefs to which the plaintiff may be found entitled. (e) Cost of the litigation. "

( 3 ) WITH regard to the cause of action, in para-39 of the plaint the plaintif




















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