Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
Not Mentioned, Not Mentioned
Parimal Chakraborty v. Manik Sutradhar
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim to land ownership and defendants' denial. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court's observation on the necessity of declaring title vs. mere possession. (Para 6 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. conclusion directing remand for procedural amendment. (Para 8 , 16) |
| 4. arguments regarding the necessity of title declaration. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. error in not providing necessary declaration led to appeal outcome. (Para 15) |
1. Heard Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Suman Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the defendant - appellants. Also heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P.L. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff - respondent.
2. The present appeal is filed under S.96 of the Civil Procedure Code , 1908 by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.1, Gomati District, Udaipur, Tripura in T.S. 44 of 2021 decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiff respondent.
3. The brief fact of this case as enumerated in the plaint before the Court below is that the plaintiff (respondent herein) purchased land measuring 1.24 acres described in sc
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
