Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Mr. A. K. Dey, Adv.
..for the defendant no.7 Mr. Sabyasachi Chowhdury, Adv.
Mr. A. K. Dey, Adv.
..for the defendant no.14 The Court : The suit is for partition. The plaintiff claims to be a member of the Berlia family and says that all business and assets of the family remain joint and they were set up by the father of the plaintiff, Gurdayal Berlia. Some of the individual defendants are the brothers of the plaintiff.

The defendant no.6 also refers to paragraph 81 of the petition relating to the present application. There are two other paragraphs which have been referred to at paragraph 81: paragraphs 74 and 77. The nature and extent of the partition that has been sought is indicated in the two sub-paragraphs of paragraph 81. The defendant no.6 submits that it is only the shareholding of the Berlia family members over which the plaintiff has asserted any right and the plaintiff has also sought to claim that the properties standing in the names of the members of the Berlia family are joint and the plaintiff is entitled to a share therein. What the defendant no.6 says is that since it does not appear from the paragraph 81 of the petition that the assets and properties of the alleged family companies are also claimed to be assets and properties of the Berlia family over which the plaintiff has some manner of right, the immediate order sought for restraining the defendant nos.6 to 18, which are the alleged family companies, from dealing with their assets, should not be entertained.