Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3173 Cal
Judgement Date : 13 June, 2022
58 13.06.2022 SA 81 of 2022 with Ct-08 I.A No. CAN 2 of 2017(Old No. CAN 3036 of 2017)
Badal Kumar Das & Anr.
Vs.
Sukumar Bandyopadhyay & Ors. ar
Mr. Kallol Basu Mrs. Sohini Chakraborty ... For the Appellants
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.
This appeal will be heard on the following substantial questions of law :-
I. Whether the learned Judge of the First Appellate Court has substantially erred in law in affirming the Judgment passed by the court below dismissing the suit on the ground that 'Ga' and 'Ga1' scheduled property are not included within the 'Kha' scheduled property disregarding the Deed being no. 6319 dated 3rd July, 1981 (Exhibit-E) showing eastern boundary of Kha scheduled property measuring 20 feet and a common passage?
II. Whether the learned Judges in
both the courts below
substantially erred in law in misappreciating the evidence and dismissing the suit relying upon the Commissioner's report?
III. Whether the findings of both the courts below with regard to Exhibit-E and Exhibit-7 are on complete misconstruction and misappreciation of the evidence leading to a serious miscarriage of justice?
Call for the records; issue usual notices.
(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury ,J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!