Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.28 seconds)

Gnanada Sundari Mojumdar vs Chandra Kumar De on 30 March, 1926

7. The counsel for Rajni Kapoor firstly contended that against an order on an application under Section 144 of the CPC, an appeal under Section 96 of the CPC lies. Reliance is placed on Gnanada Sundari Mojumdar Vs. Chandra Kumar De AIR 1927 Calcutta 285, Sheonandanlal Gurudayal Shrivastava Vs. Gopal babaji Nafde AIR 1943 Nagpur 172 and Gopal Laskar Vs. Harihar Mukherjee AIR 1948 Calcutta 37. It is further contended that even where the application is nomenclatured as under Section 151 CPC but is filed on the analogy of jurisdiction under Section 144 of the CPC, even then an appeal would be maintainable. It is argued that since the order impugned in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is appealable, the petition under Article 227 would not lie.
Calcutta High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Gopal Laskar vs Harihar Mukherjee And Ors. on 9 May, 1946

7. The counsel for Rajni Kapoor firstly contended that against an order on an application under Section 144 of the CPC, an appeal under Section 96 of the CPC lies. Reliance is placed on Gnanada Sundari Mojumdar Vs. Chandra Kumar De AIR 1927 Calcutta 285, Sheonandanlal Gurudayal Shrivastava Vs. Gopal babaji Nafde AIR 1943 Nagpur 172 and Gopal Laskar Vs. Harihar Mukherjee AIR 1948 Calcutta 37. It is further contended that even where the application is nomenclatured as under Section 151 CPC but is filed on the analogy of jurisdiction under Section 144 of the CPC, even then an appeal would be maintainable. It is argued that since the order impugned in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is appealable, the petition under Article 227 would not lie.
Calcutta High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1