Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
By The Sebait-Sri Satyendra Nath Dinda vs Sri Sri Iswar Nilkantha Mahadev Jew ... on 24 June, 2019
Author: Sanjib Banerjee
Bench: Sanjib Banerjee
1
S.A.T. 96 of 2019
S/L-9 With
24.06.2019
CAN 3507 of 2019
Ct-16
(AD)
Sri Sri Iswar Nilkantha Mahadev Jew Thakur, represented
by the Sebait-Sri Satyendra Nath Dinda
vs.
Sri Sri Iswar Nilkantha Mahadev Jew Thakur, represented
by the Sebait-Sri Bhuddhadev Dinda & Ors.
Mr. Partha Protim Roy
... for the appellant.
Mr. Anup Dasgupta
Mr. S. Sarkar
... for the respondents
The matter pertains to the rights of rival claimants to be shebaits pursuant to an Arpannama of July 21, 1948. Plaintiff Satyen was chosen by Sachinandan as the sole shebait. The rival claim is by Buddhadeb Ballav, who claims to have been adopted when Sachinandan was aged about 80.
The Arpannama executed by Radhika Prasanna Dinda named Radhika's eldest son Sachinandan as the shebait. The Arpannama instructs that Sachinandan could appoint his eldest son as a shebait after Sachinandan or could appoint anyone suitable but belonging to the Dinda family ("Aamaar Bongsojato"). Before the trial court the plaintiff-appellant succeeded as the trial court disbelieved the adoption at the age of 80. In appeal, it was observed that merely because the person was 80 years old would not stand in the way of a valid adoption. It is such order of reversal that is challenged here by way of the present appeal.
Several questions of some importance arise which are required to be addressed. Some of the questions are 2 indicated as follows:
(i) Whether the Arpannama, in its appropriate construction, give a right to even an adopted son of the first shebait to be a shebait;
(ii) Whether the alleged adoption of the defendant by Sachinandan was valid and legal;
(iii) Whether Satyen's appointment by Sachinandan was permissible in terms of the Arpannama and the Hindu law on the subject.
The appellants will put in special messenger costs for bringing the lower court records to this court within a fortnight from date. Immediately upon such costs being put in, the department is directed to take steps for bringing the lower court records. Upon such records arriving in this Court, such records be examined and, upon such records being found to be complete, the department should immediately issue a notice of arrival of the records to Advocate-on-record appearing for the appellant.
Upon service of the notice of arrival of the lower court records, the appellant is directed to prepare requisite number of informal paper-books which should be filed within three weeks of such service of notice.
Since the respondents are represented, the appeal is regarded to be ready as regards service and no fresh notice of appeal be issued.
The matter will appear before the appropriate bench in the monthly list of August, 2019.
CAN 3507 of 2019 3 As to the injunction application, CAN 3507 of 2019, there will be an order of injunction restraining the parties and each of them, whether by themselves or by their servants or agents or assigns or otherwise howsoever from dealing with or disposing of or creating any third- party interest in respect of the debuttor estate in question without the previous consent of this court. CAN 3507 of 2019 is disposed of without any order as to costs.
(Sanjib Banerjee, J.) (Suvra Ghosh, J.)