Mussamat Mafizunnissa Bibi and Another Vs The Collector of Tippera

Calcutta High Court 29 Jun 1870 Applications for Review Nos. 45 and 46 of 1870 (1870) 06 CAL CK 0003

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Applications for Review Nos. 45 and 46 of 1870

Judgement Text

Translate:

Phear, J.@mdashAs my learned colleague intimated a desire to hear further argument from the petitioner, Baboo Anukul has addressed us on the merits of the application for review; and after hearing him upon the merits, I have only to remark that I have nothing further to add to the observations which I have already made. I am of opinion that the present application must be rejected with costs. Having now heard the pleader for the petitioner upon the merits of this application, I am of opinion that this suit was a suit for damages within the meaning of section 6, Act XI of 1865. The lower Appellate Court has distinctly found that the payment was not a voluntary payment; and as the facts on which this finding has been arrived at cannot be disputed, I have no doubt in my mind that this was a suit for damages. The fact that the plaint did not expressly state that the plaintiff was suing for damages does not make any difference.

From The Blog
Quick Checklist: Start a Company in the USA from India
Nov
09
2025

Court News

Quick Checklist: Start a Company in the USA from India
Read More
Supreme Court: Release Deed Ends Coparcener Rights in Joint Family Property; Unregistered Settlements Valid to Show Severance
Nov
09
2025

Court News

Supreme Court: Release Deed Ends Coparcener Rights in Joint Family Property; Unregistered Settlements Valid to Show Severance
Read More