Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ejectment execution in The Official Trustee Of West Bengal vs Monmothonath Sadhukhan on 5 June, 1952Matching Fragments
12. The result is that all these observations of the Bombay Full Bench are obiter dicta dealing with a hypothetical problem which did not call for determination.
13. It is also unfortunate that this Bombay Full Bench failed to notice another ruling decision of the Court of Appeal of the Calcutta High Court in -- 'Baranagbre Jute Factory Co. Ltd. v, Raj Kumar Roy', reported in 13 Cal WN 724 (G). There it is clearly laid down that a decree-holder wro has resisted in the execution of a decree for ejectment may apply for possession again and again and, if again resisted, may complain against the second resistance. In that case which was ably argued at the Bar, by Dr. Rash Behary Ghosh, the eminent Jurist of India, appearing with Mr. Man-matha Nath Mukherjee, later to become the Acting Chief Justice of this Court, for the appellants and 'by Sir S. P. Sinha (later Lord Sinha) the Advocate General, for the respondent. The Bench was composed by Chitty J., an eminent Judge with large experience, and Vincent, J. At page 727 of that report the Court states: