KALIPADA GHOSH
Vs. TULSIDAS DUTT
LAWS(CAL)-1959-9-15
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on
September 21,1959
KALIPADA GHOSH
Appellant
VERSUS
TULSIDAS DUTT
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
KSHIRODE CHUNDER V. SHARADA PROSAD [REFERRED TO]BAI FATMA V. GULAMNABI HAJIBHAI [REFERRED TO]
BHAGIRATH VS. AFAQ RASUL [REFERRED TO]
DULAL CHANDRA CHATTERJEE VS. GOSTHABEHARI MITRA [REFERRED TO]
NIL KAMAL BHATTACHARJYA VS. KAMAKSHYA CHARAN BHATTACHARJYA [REFERRED TO]
GOUR CHAND BASAK VS. KHIRODE NATH BASAK [REFERRED TO]
PRAN KRISHNA BHADURI VS. KESHAB CHANDRA ROY [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
BRAHM DEV NARANG VS. SATYAJEET NARANG [LAWS(DLH)-1999-11-27] [REFERRED]COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. M KALPAGAM [LAWS(MAD)-1996-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
K M SHAH VS. DY C I T [LAWS(GJH)-2004-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
MUKUNDI VS. RAM NARAIN [LAWS(ALL)-1981-2-9] [REFERRED TO]
BHANUMATHI VS. K. ABDURAHIMAN HAJI [LAWS(KER)-2022-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
P MARIAPPAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-1990-11-64] [REFERRED TO]
NIRUPOMA BASAK VS. BAIDYANATH PRAMANICK [LAWS(CAL)-1984-12-32] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR MUKHOPADHAYA VS. PROVASH CHANDRA MAJUMDAR [LAWS(CAL)-1967-5-23] [REFERRED TO]
GANDHARBA PRADHAN VS. BISHNU CHARAN PRADHAN [LAWS(ORI)-2023-12-94] [REFERRED TO]
RADHABALLAV KUNDU VS. PURNA CHANDRA SINGH [LAWS(CAL)-1978-4-41] [REFERRED TO]
GITANJALI PADHI VS. HARI SAHOO AND OTHERS [LAWS(ORI)-2016-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
ABANTI KUMAR SHEET VS. MR. SK. YEAR ALL AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-1996-12-41] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Banerjee, J. -
(1.)One Girish Chandra Dutt was the owner of certain properties, which were made the subject of a suit for partition. Out of an application, under Section 4 of the Partition Act, made in the aforesaid suit for partition, the present appeal arises.
(2.)Girish was succeeded by three sons, namely Tulsidas (the plaintiff respondent No. 1), Bonbehari (defendant No. 1, who is the respondent No. 2) and Satya Sadhan (father and husband respectively of defendants Nos. 2 and 3, who are respondents Nos. 3 and 4). Sankar Charan (defendant No. 4, who is respondent No. 5) is the son of the plaintiff. He was made a party to the partition suit in his capacity as the purchaser of a certain share in some of the properties included in the partition suit. Kali-pada (defendant No. 5, who is the appellant) is the transferee of the share of defendants Nos. 2 and 3 (respondents No. 3 and 4) in some out of the several properties, which were included in the suit for partition.
(3.)The property in dispute is C. S. Plot No. 1596, recorded in Khatian No. 183 of Mouza Khato-ra. In the settlement record the land is recorded as Udbasu land, measuring 19 cent. The said plot was described in item No. 2 of the Schedule to the plaint.
(2.)Girish was succeeded by three sons, namely Tulsidas (the plaintiff respondent No. 1), Bonbehari (defendant No. 1, who is the respondent No. 2) and Satya Sadhan (father and husband respectively of defendants Nos. 2 and 3, who are respondents Nos. 3 and 4). Sankar Charan (defendant No. 4, who is respondent No. 5) is the son of the plaintiff. He was made a party to the partition suit in his capacity as the purchaser of a certain share in some of the properties included in the partition suit. Kali-pada (defendant No. 5, who is the appellant) is the transferee of the share of defendants Nos. 2 and 3 (respondents No. 3 and 4) in some out of the several properties, which were included in the suit for partition.
(3.)The property in dispute is C. S. Plot No. 1596, recorded in Khatian No. 183 of Mouza Khato-ra. In the settlement record the land is recorded as Udbasu land, measuring 19 cent. The said plot was described in item No. 2 of the Schedule to the plaint.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.