TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court orders trial on additional property title issues under Bijni Succession Act, 1931, emphasizing independent consideration.</h1> <h3>Debendra Narain Roy Versus Jogendra Narain Deb and Ors.</h3> The High Court of Calcutta directed the Subordinate Judge to proceed with the trial of additional issues raised in two suits concerning property title ... - Issues: Order of trial for additional issues raised in two suits regarding title of property under Bijni Succession Act, 1931.The judgment by the High Court of Calcutta involved a challenge against the order of the Subordinate Judge directing the trial of additional issues raised in two suits concerning the title of property under the Bijni Succession Act, 1931. The Court noted that the suits pertained to the petitioner's claim to the Bijni Raj in Assam and a property in Bengal. The application to try these issues as preliminary issues was opposed, citing provisions of Order 14, Rule 2, and Order 15, Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code. The Court, however, held that these provisions did not apply in this case, as the application was made after the first hearing date. The Court emphasized the need to consider the trial procedure independently of the Civil Procedure Code provisions.Regarding the piecemeal trial of suits, the Court acknowledged the potential inconvenience and costs but highlighted the need for discretion based on the specific circumstances of each case. It was clarified that the additional issues raised should not be treated as pure questions of law but as mixed questions of fact and law. The Court disagreed with the lower court's view that the suits could be disposed of solely on the issues of law, indicating that all issues needed consideration.The High Court directed the Subordinate Judge to proceed with the trial of the additional issues raised in the suits, allowing parties to present evidence if necessary. Depending on the outcome of these issues, the suits would either be dismissed or further dealt with based on the original issues. This order was made to ensure justice and was within the Court's revisional jurisdiction. No costs were awarded, and the records were to be sent down promptly. Justice M.C. Ghose agreed with the judgment.
TaxTMI 
