REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Upendra Nath Poddar Appellant

V/S

Anath Chandra Lodh Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

LUKE V. SOUTH KENSINGTON HOTEL CO. [REFERRED]
MONOHAR GANESH TAMBEKAR V. LOKSHIRAM GOVINDRAM [REFERRED]
CULLEN V. KNOWLES [REFERRED]
HUGHES V. PUMP HOUSE HOTEL CO.,LTD. [REFERRED]
MOHUNT BHAGAWAN RAMAUNJ DAS V. KHETTER MONI DASSI [REFERRED]
HRIDAY KRISHNA KUNDU V. BENODE BEHARI BANDHOPADHAYA [REFERRED]
SREE SREE SREEDHAR JEW V. KANTA MOHAN MULLICK [REFERRED]
MONGHIBAI V. COOVERJI UMERSEY [REFERRED]
PRASAD DAS PAL V. JAGANNATH PAL [REFERRED]
BHOAPATI NATH CHAKRABARTI V. BASANTA KUMAREE DEBEE [REFERRED]
RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING,LTD. V. BHABANI CHANDRA BANERJEE [REFERRED]
BEAUMONT V. OLIVEIRA [REFERRED]
SUNDARI CHAUDHURY V. RELIANCE BANK LTD. [REFERRED]
NIRMAL CHANDRA BANERJEE V. JYOTIPROSAD BANDOPADHYAY [REFERRED]
<RC>ILR(CAL) 1951 1 665;LAWSUIT(CAL) 1950 0 259;</RC> HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA <JGN>BACHAWAT</JGN> UPENDRA NATH PODDAR ANATH CHANDRA LODH <AT>APPLICATION IN ORIGINAL SUIT 3142 OF 1948</AT> 05.05.1950 <SUBJECT>CIVIL,CONTRACT,PROPERTY</SUBJECT><SI> CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,1908 OR 21R 63;STAMP ACT,1899 ART 33;STAMP ACT,1899 ART 156;STAMP ACT,1899 SEC 2(24);STAMP ACT,1899 ART 154;STAMP ACT,1899 ART 58;STAMP ACT,1899 ART 407A;SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT,1877 SEC 3; <ACT>CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,1908</ACT> <S>OR.21R.63</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>ART.33</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>ART.156</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>S.2(24)</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>ART.154</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>ART.58</S><ACT>STAMP ACT,1899</ACT> <S>ART.407A</S><ACT>SPECIFIC RELIEF AC [REFERRED TO]
EMPEROR V. AHMAD ZAMAN KHAN [REFERRED]
BHUPATI NATH SMRITITIRTHA VS. RAM LAL MAITRA [REFERRED]
IN RE: STAMP REFERENCE BY THE BOARD OF REVENUE VS. STATE [REFERRED]
CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY C. P. AND BERAR VS. MT. SARJUBAI W/O. LAKHARLAL AND OTHERS [REFERRED]
MOHAMMAD RASHID AHMAD VS. EMPEROR [REFERRED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application on behalf of Abinash Chandra Lodh and Hari Mohan Lodh, two of the shebaits of Sri Sri Lakshminarayan Jiu, goddess Durga, Basanti, Kali and Lakshmi, for an order that certain attachments levied on the estate be at once withdrawn and for other reliefs.

(2.) On May 6, 1949, a decree was passed in this suit by consent against the Defendant. The decree was for a sum of Rs. 4,547-3-3. Certain instalments were agreed to and there was an undertaking on behalf of the Defendant not to dispose of his house, being premises No. 14/3, Nimtala Ghat Street. He was in default in payment of instalments and on March 3, 1950, the Plaintiff levied an attachment in execution of the decree on the one-third share of the Defendant in premises No. 14/3, Nimtala Ghat Street and also several trunks, two chairs and one fan lying in that premises. On March 17, 1950, this' notice of motion was taken out. The ground taken in the petition is that the properties attached are debater properties and that the premises No. 14/3, Nimtala Ghat Street, was dedicated to the Deities by a deed, dated April 24, 1937.

(3.) By that deed, the settlors, Anath Chandra Lodh, Hari Mohan Lodh, Abinash Chandra Lodh, appointed themselves and one Hriday Chandra Lodh and Sanatan Lodh as shebaits.

Click here to view full judgment.

UPENDRA NATH PODDAR Vs. ANATH CHANDRA LODH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address