UDAY CHAND DUTT Vs. SAIBAL SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Appeal against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on leave granted by this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The Appellants before us are the heirs and legal representatives of the original plaintiff who was unsuccessful in both the Courts below. After the High Court decided the appeal the original defendant died and the Respondents 1 (a) to 1(c) are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased defendant who has been mentioned as Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 is merely a pro forma Respondent. It may be clarified that when the appeal was decided by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court the defendant was the only respondent.

(3.) The facts necessary for the disposal of this Appeal are as follows: The original plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Seventh Court, Alipore, District, 24 Parganas, for a declaration that a certain transaction effected by a deed of sale dated 28th February, 1968 executed by him in favour of the defendant, the Respondent No. 1 (deceased) herein, is, in substance, a loan transaction and for taking accounts under Section 36(l) of the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940. For the sake of convenience, we propose to refer to the parties, namely, the original plaintiff who was the predecessor in title of the present Appellants and the Respondent No. 1 by their description in the suit.