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

1957 Supreme(All) 78

MUKERJI, TANDON
SITA RAM SAHU – Appellant
Versus
KEDARNATH SAHU – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.B.MISHRA, HARNANDAN PRASAD, K.L.MISHRA

MUKERJI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision against an order of the learned. Civil Judge granting time to the plaintiff to make good the deficiency in court-fees after the plaint had been rejected under order 7, Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the plaint had been insufficiently stamped.

( 2 ) IT is necessary to state a few dates in order to appreciate the point that arises for our consideration in this application in revision. On 13-2-1950 a suit was filed on the foot of a mortgage deed. There was report by the Stamp Reporter in respect of some deficiency in regard to court-fees. Time in the first instance was granted by the Court to make good the deficiency upto 16-2-1950. The deficiency was not made good, but an application for further time was made on behalf of the plaintiff. Time was granted. It is not necessary to mention in detail the various occasions on Which time was granted to the plaintiff to make good the deficiency, for we think it sufficient for our purposes to state that the plaintiff was granted several opportunities to make good the deficiency. We may further mention that the plaintiff did not, however, remain inactive complet







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