In Re: Jankee Bullub Sen

Calcutta High Court 31 May 1867 Miscellaneous Appeal No. 495 of 1866 (1867) 05 CAL CK 0005

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Miscellaneous Appeal No. 495 of 1866

Judgement Text

Translate:

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe think that the Principal Sudder Ameen had power to do what he did. Whether he raised a right issue, with reference to the alleged adjustment or not, it is clear that he required the attendance of Jankee as a witness to be examined as to the alleged adjustment, and that Jankee, the witness, refused to attend. The Principal Sudder Ameen therefore had a right to deal with him according to law as a witness refusing to attend. Under these circumstances, we think that this Court, in the exercise of its general power of superintendence over the lower Courts, ought not to interfere with the order of the Principal Sudder Ameen.


(1) See In the matter of the Petition of Gobind Coomar Chowdhary, ante, p. 714.

From The Blog
Aishwarya Rai Bachchan Wins ₹4 Crore Tax Case at ITAT Mumbai
Nov
07
2025

Court News

Aishwarya Rai Bachchan Wins ₹4 Crore Tax Case at ITAT Mumbai
Read More
Supreme Court to Decide If Section 12AA Registration Alone Grants Trusts 80G Tax Benefits for Donors
Nov
07
2025

Court News

Supreme Court to Decide If Section 12AA Registration Alone Grants Trusts 80G Tax Benefits for Donors
Read More