ARUN KUMAR MONDAL PRIYANKA MANDAL vs HAGRU GORAIN & ORS — SA/193/2016

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: WBCHCA0032832016

Filing Number

SA/3283/2016

Filing Date

17-Apr-2015

Registration No

SA/193/2016

Registration Date

17-Apr-2015

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP B (CIVIL MATTERS) ( 2 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 57 )

Judicial Branch

SECOND APPEAL (SA) SECTION

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ARUN KUMAR MONDAL PRIYANKA MANDAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HAGRU GORAIN & ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

    Summary: Arun Kumar Mondal v. Hagru Gorain (SA 193/2016) Court: High Court at Calcutta Judge: Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay Date of Judgment: May 5, 2026 Decision The High Court allowed the Second Appeal, setting aside the First Appellate Court's reversal and restoring the Trial Court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff/appellant. The plaintiff was declared the absolute, lawful owner of 1.40 acres of land (derived from C.S. Plot No. 2816, finalized as L.R. Plot No. 3057) with a decree for confirmation and recovery of possession. Key Facts - The original land (C.S. Plot No. 2816, 8.42 acres) was partitioned between two co-owners in 1931 - Rashbihari Banerjee sold 8.42 acres to Tinkari Chakraborty and his brothers in 1959 - Tinkari's individual share was 1.40 acres (1/6th of total) - Tinkari sold his 1.40 acres to the plaintiff by registered deed in 1983 - A clerical error during settlement resulted in the plot being recorded as R.S. No. 3047 instead of R.S. No. 3057 - Defendant No. 1 was the attesting witness to the 1983 sale deed - Defendants later claimed ownership through a 2012 deed allegedly from Tinkari's daughter (Parul Chakraborty) Main Issues & Findings 1. Vagueness of Property Description (Question 1) — ANSWERED AFFIRMATIVELY The High Court held that the absence of boundaries in the property schedule does NOT render the description vague when: - A specific plot number (C.S. Plot No. 2816) is clearly identified - An exact area (1.40 acres) is specified - The parent title is established through registered deeds - A prior civil court decree (1982 in Title Suit No. 32 of 1980) had already declared the plot identifier error as "void and non-binding" The Court established that plot numbers—being official government survey markers—are the most precise identification tools and implicitly reference fixed boundaries within state registries. 2. Possession & Section 34 of Specific Relief Act (Question 2) — ANSWERED NEGATIVELY The First Appellate Court erred in holding that: - The plaintiff's prayer for "confirmation of possession" was insufficient - The suit was barred by Section 34 (Specific Relief Act) for not seeking "recovery" The High Court found: - The plaintiff explicitly prayed for a permanent injunction (not temporary), which constitutes "further relief" satisfying Section 34 - For vacant/danga land, possession follows title—once title is established, legal constructive possession is presumed - The court can mould relief under Order VII Rule 7 of CPC to grant recovery of possession where title is proven but possession is disputed - Defendant No. 1's status as an attesting witness to the 1983 deed estops him from later denying the plaintiff's title Critical Legal Principles Endorsed 1. Registered deeds carry formidable presumptions of validity and cannot be lightly overturned 2. Revenue records are NOT title documents—mere errors in land records cannot defeat registered conveyances 3. Nemo dat quod non habet (Section 48, TPA)—Tinkari completely divested himself of the 1.40 acres in 1983; his daughter inherited nothing, making the 2012 deed void *ab initio* 4. Principle of Identity Over Nomenclature—clerical errors in plot numbering must be resolved by examining the totality of the parent title and historical lineage 5. Civil courts must prioritize substantive justice over procedural technicalities and avoid multiplying lawsuits Decrees Issued - Plaintiff declared absolute, lawful owner of Schedule-II property (1.40 acres) - Decree for confirmation and recovery of vacant possession granted - 2012 deed (Exhibit A) declared fraudulent, void *ab initio*, and non-binding - Defendants ordered to vacate immediately if unlawfully in possession - Respond This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    For Judgment

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  4. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  5. 04-May-2026

    For Judgment

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  6. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  7. 06-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  8. 06-Jan-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  9. 05-Jan-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  10. 26-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  11. 26-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  12. 25-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  13. 24-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  14. 21-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  15. 20-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  16. 19-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  17. 18-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  18. 17-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  19. 14-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  20. 13-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  21. 13-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  22. 28-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta

  23. 27-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  24. 21-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  25. 20-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  26. 19-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  27. 18-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  28. 14-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  29. 13-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  30. 12-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  31. 11-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  32. 08-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  33. 07-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  34. 06-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  35. 05-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  36. 04-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  37. 02-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  38. 01-Aug-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  39. 31-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  40. 30-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  41. 29-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  42. 28-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  43. 25-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  44. 24-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  45. 23-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  46. 22-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  47. 21-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  48. 18-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  49. 17-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  50. 16-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  51. 15-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  52. 14-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  53. 10-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  54. 09-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  55. 08-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  56. 07-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  57. 04-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  58. 03-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  59. 02-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  60. 01-Jul-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  61. 30-Jun-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  62. 26-Jun-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  63. 25-Jun-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  64. 25-Mar-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  65. 25-Mar-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  66. 26-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  67. 26-Feb-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  68. 14-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  69. 28-Nov-2024

    Second Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  70. 18-Sep-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  71. 18-Sep-2024

    Second Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  72. 23-Aug-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  73. 23-Aug-2024

    Second Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  74. 20-Aug-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  75. 07-Aug-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya BandyopadhyayView PDF

  76. 07-Aug-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay

  77. 05-Mar-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  78. 05-Mar-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  79. 05-Mar-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  80. 04-Mar-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  81. 29-Feb-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  82. 29-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  83. 28-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  84. 27-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  85. 26-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  86. 19-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  87. 12-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  88. 09-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  89. 08-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  90. 07-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  91. 06-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  92. 05-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  93. 02-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  94. 01-Feb-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  95. 31-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  96. 29-Jan-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  97. 29-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  98. 26-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  99. 25-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  100. 22-Jan-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  101. 22-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  102. 22-Jan-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  103. 19-Jan-2024

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  104. 17-Jan-2024

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  105. 17-Jan-2024

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  106. 15-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  107. 14-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  108. 13-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  109. 12-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  110. 11-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  111. 08-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  112. 07-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  113. 06-Dec-2023

    Specially Fixed Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  114. 05-Dec-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  115. 04-Dec-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  116. 30-Nov-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  117. 28-Nov-2023

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy ChowdhuryView PDF

  118. 28-Nov-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  119. 16-Nov-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  120. 18-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  121. 17-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  122. 13-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  123. 12-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  124. 11-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  125. 10-Oct-2023

    Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury

  126. 14-Jun-2023

    LD. Registrar Admn. (L and Om)View PDF

  127. 12-Apr-2023

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas PattanayakView PDF

  128. 12-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  129. 11-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  130. 10-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  131. 06-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  132. 05-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  133. 04-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  134. 03-Apr-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  135. 31-Mar-2023

    For Hearing

    Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak

  136. 15-Feb-2023

    LD. Registrar Admn. (L and Om)View PDF

  137. 10-Mar-2022

    Hon'ble Justice Biswajit BasuView PDF

  138. 10-Mar-2022

    Hon'ble Justice Biswajit BasuView PDF

  139. 10-Mar-2022

    Application In Connection With Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Biswajit Basu

  140. 09-Mar-2022

    Application In Connection With Appeal

    Hon'ble Justice Biswajit Basu

  141. 05-Oct-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  142. 17-Apr-2015

    Case filed

    Registration No. SA/193/2016

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: Arun Kumar Mondal v. Hagru Gorain (SA 193/2016) Court: High Court at Calcutta Judge: Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay Date of Judgment: May 5, 2026 Decision The High Court allowed the Second Appeal, setting aside the First Appellate Court's reversal and restoring the Trial Court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff/appellant. The plaintiff was declared the absolute, lawful owner of 1.40 acres of land (derived from C.S. Plot No. 2816, finalized as L.R. Plot No. 3057) with a decree for confirmation and recovery of possession. Key Facts - The original land (C.S. Plot No. 2816, 8.42 acres) was partitioned between two co-owners in 1931 - Rashbihari Banerjee sold 8.42 acres to Tinkari Chakraborty and his brothers in 1959 - Tinkari's individual share was 1.40 acres (1/6th of total) - Tinkari sold his 1.40 acres to the plaintiff by registered deed in 1983 - A clerical error during settlement resulted in the plot being recorded as R.S. No. 3047 instead of R.S. No. 3057 - Defendant No. 1 was the attesting witness to the 1983 sale deed - Defendants later claimed ownership through a 2012 deed allegedly from Tinkari's daughter (Parul Chakraborty) Main Issues & Findings 1. Vagueness of Property Description (Question 1) — ANSWERED AFFIRMATIVELY The High Court held that the absence of boundaries in the property schedule does NOT render the description vague when: - A specific plot number (C.S. Plot No. 2816) is clearly identified - An exact area (1.40 acres) is specified - The parent title is established through registered deeds - A prior civil court decree (1982 in Title Suit No. 32 of 1980) had already declared the plot identifier error as "void and non-binding" The Court established that plot numbers—being official government survey markers—are the most precise identification tools and implicitly reference fixed boundaries within state registries. 2. Possession & Section 34 of Specific Relief Act (Question 2) — ANSWERED NEGATIVELY The First Appellate Court erred in holding that: - The plaintiff's prayer for "confirmation of possession" was insufficient - The suit was barred by Section 34 (Specific Relief Act) for not seeking "recovery" The High Court found: - The plaintiff explicitly prayed for a permanent injunction (not temporary), which constitutes "further relief" satisfying Section 34 - For vacant/danga land, possession follows title—once title is established, legal constructive possession is presumed - The court can mould relief under Order VII Rule 7 of CPC to grant recovery of possession where title is proven but possession is disputed - Defendant No. 1's status as an attesting witness to the 1983 deed estops him from later denying the plaintiff's title Critical Legal Principles Endorsed 1. Registered deeds carry formidable presumptions of validity and cannot be lightly overturned 2. Revenue records are NOT title documents—mere errors in land records cannot defeat registered conveyances 3. Nemo dat quod non habet (Section 48, TPA)—Tinkari completely divested himself of the 1.40 acres in 1983; his daughter inherited nothing, making the 2012 deed void *ab initio* 4. Principle of Identity Over Nomenclature—clerical errors in plot numbering must be resolved by examining the totality of the parent title and historical lineage 5. Civil courts must prioritize substantive justice over procedural technicalities and avoid multiplying lawsuits Decrees Issued - Plaintiff declared absolute, lawful owner of Schedule-II property (1.40 acres) - Decree for confirmation and recovery of vacant possession granted - 2012 deed (Exhibit A) declared fraudulent, void *ab initio*, and non-binding - Defendants ordered to vacate immediately if unlawfully in possession - Respond This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case