SUBODH GOPAL BOSE versus AJIT KUMAR HALDAR AND OTHERS

SUBODH GOPAL BOSE versus AJIT KUMAR HALDAR AND OTHERS

Section 7(1)(a) of the Bengal Land Revenue Sales (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1950 applies to pending suits or appeals; since the civil appeal was pending when the Amending Act commenced, and the relevant tenure existed at the relevant date, the suit abated under section 7(1)(a); delivery of possession during pendency of appeal does not prevent abatement, and it is not necessary to consider its effect.

Parties
Appellant: Subodh Gopal Bose; Respondents: Ajit Kumar Haldar and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 May 1963
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Calcutta High Court Judgment and Decree Dated June 16, 1958 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 144 of 1948
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Revenue Sale, Annulment of Encumbrance, Retrospective Operation of Statutes, Abatement of Suit, Effect of Pending Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Subodh Gopal Bose

Appellant

Ajit Kumar Haldar and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Calcutta High Court Judgment and Decree Dated June 16, 1958 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 144 of 1948

  1. 1 Whether the Bengal Land Revenue Sales (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1950 applies retrospectively to pending litigation concerning annulment of tenures under section 37 of the Bengal Land Revenue Sales Act, 1859.
  2. 2 Whether delivery of possession prior to the Amending Act insulated the plaintiff's decree from the Act's provisions.
  3. 3 Whether the suit abated under section 7 of the Amending Act.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 7(1)(a) of the Bengal Land Revenue Sales (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1950 applies to pending suits or appeals; since the civil appeal was pending when the Amending Act commenced, and the relevant tenure existed at the relevant date, the suit abated under section 7(1)(a); delivery of possession during pendency of appeal does not prevent abatement, and it is not necessary to consider its effect.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; suit abated under the Amending Act; no order as to costs in Supreme Court.