HARIDAS ROY Vs. CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD
LAWS(CAL)-1972-3-13
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on
March 09,1972
HARIDAS ROY
Appellant
VERSUS
CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION)
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
K.M.MARAKKAYAR V. M.K.AYYAR [REFERRED TO]KHIARAJMAL V. DIAM [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAT V. BIRENDRA [REFERRED TO]
K.KBEHARI V. KUNHIPAKKI [REFERRED TO]
CHATURBHUJADOSS KUSHALDOSS V. RAJAMANICKA MUDALI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. NATHURAM [REFERRED TO]
RAM SARUP DALIP SINGH MEHAR SINGH DAYAL SINGH VS. MUNSHI:SUNDER SINGH:AJAIB SINGH:SURJAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAM CHARAN [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHWAR PRASAD VS. SHAMBEHARI LAL JAGANNATH [REFERRED TO]
DAYA RAMA VS. SHVAM SUNDARI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAM BOHRA [REFERRED TO]
N K MOHAMMAD SULAIMAN SAHIB VS. N C MOHAMMAD ISMAIL SAHEB [REFERRED TO]
CHAND VS. JAGDISH PERSHAD KISHAN CHAND [REFERRED TO]
DOLAI MALIKO VS. KRUSHNA CHANDRA PATNAIK [REFERRED TO]
RANI VS. SANTA BALA DEBNATH [REFERRED TO]
MAHABIR PRASAD VS. JAGE RAM [REFERRED TO]
RAMDASS VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH KUMAR MONDAL VS. NANDALAL CHAKRAPANI [REFERRED TO]
SARAT CHANDRA DEB VS. BICHITRANANDA SAHU [REFERRED TO]
SHUNMUGHAM CHETTIAR VS. K A GOVINDASAMI CHETTIAR [REFERRED TO]
BIBHUTI BHUSAN ROY VS. NARENDRA NARAYAN GHOSE [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Laik, J. -
(1.)The relevant facts leading to the present appeal are as follows : On August 4, 1941, one Debendra Chandra Roy (hereinafter referred to as Deben) and his son Indu Bhusan Roy (hereinafter referred to as Indu) executed a mortgage in favour of the Respondent No. 1, the Calcutta Commercial Bank, in liquidation (hereinafter referred to as the Bank), to secure the repayment of a sum of Rs. 8,000/- and odd. The mortgaged property was a piece of rent-free Brahmottar land, situate in Belghoria in the district of 24 Parganas, the mortgagors holding permanent intermediary interest therein.
(2.)In March 1950, a suit was instituted by the Bank for enforcement of the said security against Deben and his two sons Santi and Indu being Defendants Nos. 1. 2 and 4 respectively. Two other persons viz., Soroshi and Aswini were impleaded as Defendants Nos. 3 and 5 respectively.
(3.)Deben died in May, 1950 leaving behind him, surviving his widow Sm. Saraiu Bala and his 4 sons viz., the said Santi (Respondent No. 2), Indu (Respondent No. 3). Haridas (Appellant No, 1) and Narayan (Respondent No. 4), Deben left also one daughter viz., Sm. Sadhana Roy Chowdhury being Appellant No. 2 in the above appeal.
(2.)In March 1950, a suit was instituted by the Bank for enforcement of the said security against Deben and his two sons Santi and Indu being Defendants Nos. 1. 2 and 4 respectively. Two other persons viz., Soroshi and Aswini were impleaded as Defendants Nos. 3 and 5 respectively.
(3.)Deben died in May, 1950 leaving behind him, surviving his widow Sm. Saraiu Bala and his 4 sons viz., the said Santi (Respondent No. 2), Indu (Respondent No. 3). Haridas (Appellant No, 1) and Narayan (Respondent No. 4), Deben left also one daughter viz., Sm. Sadhana Roy Chowdhury being Appellant No. 2 in the above appeal.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.