JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) BACKDROP
1. One Mr. Sarat Sashi Mallick was a Barrister by profession. He had a
roaring practice both at Calcutta and Patna. He had two wives, Smt.
Radharani Dasi residing at Calcutta and Mrs. Jeawlta Christabel
Mallick residing at Patna. Radharani had only one daughter, namely,
Rasheswari Dasi. Christabel had more than one child. Sarat Sashi
Mallick made his fortune. He had properties at both places having
the respective control of his two branches headed by his respective
wives. He had liquid cash invested in banks and financial
institutions. The dispute arose after the death of Sarat Sashi Mallick.
(2.) The parties however resolved their dispute. The settlement was
recorded in writing through an Indenture dated April 20, 1929. By
the said Indenture both the wives recognized each other to be the
widow of the deceased. Christabel allowed withdrawal of money from
banks by Radharani. She also paid Rs.6500/- in cash to Radharani.
Radharani got Rs.20037-6-9. It was agreed, Rs.15000/- would be
invested in an appropriate account, the interest of which would be
used by Radharani and Rasheswari during their life time. After their
demise, the male children of Rasheswari would get it in equal share
absolutely. The Indenture however gave an absolute right to the
balance sum of Rs.5037-6-9/- to Radharani Devi with liberty to
spend the same as per her likings and without any objection, if any,
raised by Rasheswari or her male children. In exchange, Patna
properties were retained by Christabel and her children. We also find
another document dated October 2, 1931 being a Declaration made
by Radharani to the effect that she had purchased a house at 9,
Panchanantala Lane, Calcutta in a Court auction on June 5, 1931.
By the said Declaration, Radharani recorded that she was the full
owner and proprietor of the premises in question and one Janoki
Nath Sen did not have any right over the same. In 1979, Radharani
died leaving her surviving her sole heir Rasheswari. Rasheswari died
on May 12, 1979 leaving her surviving Durga Narayan Sen and Satya
Narayan Sen (hereinafter referred to as Sens), Tara Dey, Smt. Mira
Dey and Gouri Laha being her children. By a Deed of Indenture
dated August 10, 1993 Durga and Satya being the respondent no.1
and 2 duly conveyed the property in favour of Shri Nirmal Chandra
Bhattacharya and Smt. Lili Bhattacharya (hereinafter referred to
Bhattacharyas) being the respondent no.4 and 5 who were already in
part possession of the house as tenant. The respondent no.6 to 10
were the other tenants.
LITIGATION
(3.) Bhattacharjees filed ejectment suit as against the tenants being the
respondent no.6 to 10 and ultimately obtained decree of eviction
against them that was affirmed up to the Apex Court level. During
the pendency of the said proceeding the appellant being one of the
grand children (Daughters branch) of Rasheswari filed a suit being
Title Suit no.2680 of 1997 inter alia praying for a Declaration that the
scheduled property being 9, Panchanantala Lane, Calcutta was a
joint property of the estate of Rasheswari and thus was liable to
partition. The Deed of Conveyance executed on August 13, 1993 was
liable to be declared null and void. He made the other heirs of the
daughter brunch as proforma defendants being respondent no.11, 12
and 13 above named. He also made the tenants as parties including
both Durga Narayan Sen and Satya Narayan Sen as also
Bhattacharjees.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.