Back
ARINDAM LODH, S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY
Gautam Majumder – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. D. Sarma, learned Additional GA appearing for respondents no. 1 and 2 and Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3, TRTC.
2. All the appeals being RFA 43 of 2019; RFA 44 of 2019 and RFA 45 of 2019 are taken up for disposal by a common judgment since common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals.
3. These appeals have been filed by the plaintiff-appellants under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgments and decrees dated 03.09.2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court no. 2, West Tripura, Agartala in case Nos. M.S. 31 of 2016; M.S. 32 of 2016 and M.S. 33 of 2016 respectively, claiming for declaration that the plaintiff in RFA 43 of 2019 is entitled to recover Rs. 13,99,012/-; plaintiff in RFA 44 of 2019 is entitled to recover Rs. 11,89,591/-, and plaintiff in RFA 45 of 2019 is entitled to recover Rs. 12,78,290/- alongwith interest..
4. Relevant facts sans unnecessary details may be reproduced here-in- below, as projected by the learned tri
Suits barred by limitation when not filed within the statutory period after the cause of action arises, requiring timely legal action against invalidated statutory authority.
The time for suit initiation under the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act begins at the record publication date, not knowledge. Claims are dismissed for failure to comply with limitation and notice requirements....
The court upheld the plaintiff's lawful claim over the disputed property, affirming that encroachment by the defendant was illegal and the suit was filed within the prescribed limitation period.
The relevant date for considering applications is the date of consideration, not the date of application. The Court emphasized the need for a liberal approach in condoning delay to ensure substantial....
Failure to issue statutory notices under Section 80 CPC led to suit dismissal; adverse possession established valid title, barring plaintiff's claims.
A cause of action based on an approved bill resets limitation; rejection of plaint under Rule 11 is unwarranted where factual disputes exist.
Rule 1 Order XXIX of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 "Subscription and verification of pleading" In suits by or against a corporation, any pleading may be signed and verified on behalf of corporation by....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
