Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Durlav Prodhania and anr. Vs. Mahammad Mainaddi Bepari, and ors.

Durlav Prodhania and anr. vs Mahammad Mainaddi Bepari, and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Jan 28, 1909
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/882014

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Tenancy

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Bengal Tenancy Act (VIII of 1885), Section 173, - Second appeal--Auction-purchaser--Rent-decree--Sale set aside. -

Key legal issue
Tenancy

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Durlav Prodhania and anr.

Respondent

Mahammad Mainaddi Bepari, and ors.

Legal References

Cases Referred
Chand Monee Dasya v. Santo Monee Dasya
Reported In
1Ind.Cas.279

Excerpt

bengal tenancy act (viii of 1885), section 173, - second appeal--auction-purchaser--rent-decree--sale set aside. - 1. in this case, the subordinate judge of tipperah has set aside a sale in execution of a rent decree on the ground that the auction-purchaser is the benamidar of the judgment-debtor. the auction-purchaser appeals.2. a preliminary objection is taken that no second appeal lies, the order having been passed under section 173 of the bengal tenancy act. this point appears to be concluded by the authority of the cases cited in mr. rampini's commentary of the bengal. tenancy act, under section 173.3. it is argued on the authority of the case of chand monee dasya v. santo monee dasya 24 c. 707, that a second appeal lies in this case. we find, however, that in that case the second appellant to the high court was one of the judgment-debtors, who had asked that the sale should be set aside on the ground that the purchaser was a benamidar of one of his fellow--judgment-debtors. it may well be that section 234 of the former c.p.c. gave a judgment-debtor or a decree-holder a right of appeal against an order under section 173, but this case is no authority for holding that an auction-purchaser has a similar right.4. the cases cited establish that an auction-purchaser has no right of appeal against an order passed under section 173 of the bengal tenancy act. this appeal must, accordingly, be dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

1. In this case, the Subordinate Judge of Tipperah has set aside a sale in execution of a rent decree on the ground that the auction-purchaser is the benamidar of the judgment-debtor. The auction-purchaser appeals.

2. A preliminary objection is taken that no second appeal lies, the order having been passed under Section 173 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. This point appears to be concluded by the authority of the cases cited in Mr. Rampini's Commentary of the Bengal. Tenancy Act, under Section 173.

3. It is argued on the authority of the case of Chand Monee Dasya v. Santo Monee Dasya 24 C. 707, that a second appeal lies in this case. We find, however, that in that case the second appellant to the High Court was one of the judgment-debtors, who had asked that the sale should be set aside on the ground that the purchaser was a benamidar of one of his fellow--judgment-debtors. It may well be that Section 234 of the former C.P.C. gave a judgment-debtor or a decree-holder a right of appeal against an order under Section 173, but this case is no authority for holding that an auction-purchaser has a similar right.

4. The cases cited establish that an auction-purchaser has no right of appeal against an order passed under Section 173 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. This appeal must, accordingly, be dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial