Found 0 result
Showing 1157531- 1157540 of 0 result for ""
McDonell, J.@mdashWe think that the order of the Subordinate Judge in this case ought not to be interfered with, though we do not agree with the reasons upon which he has based his decision. The property, Bazzapti Mehal…
Wilson, J.@mdashThis is an appeal from a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Dacca. The suit was brought by the appellants to recover certain chur lands, as being a re-formation on the site of their Chur Rajapore. There …
Sir M. E. Smith. 1. This is an action brought by Sudisht Lai, a mahajun carrying on his business at Mozufferpore, against Mussamut Sheobarat Koer, to recover a sum of Rs. 23,470 and interest, upon the footing of a stat…
McDonell, J.@mdashThe facts of this case are briefly as follows: One Romoni Dasi, the widow of Digambar Mondol, borrowed Rs, 2,000 from the ancestor of the defendants in the present case upon the mortgage of a certain p…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashWe think that the first question should be answered in the negative. 2. As to the second question, we think that the week allowed for recleaning the seed commenced from the 10th July, when the …
Phillips, J.@mdashSection 23 of the Insolvent Act does not affect the mortgagee. This case comes within the principle laid down in Reynolds v. Bowley (L. R. 2 Q. B. 474; in the Court below, Id., 41), which decides, that…
Pontifex, J.@mdashThe plaintiff is a minor, and sues by her next friend to set aside a compromise sanctioned by this Court in a former suit. 2. In that suit her title was stated in the following way: One Sudickjee, of…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashThe only material question which we are called upon to decide in this appeal, is as to the maintenance. The plaintiff''s right to the dower is hardly disputed. 2. Mr. Piffard certainly contende…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashI think that the judgment of the Court below should be affirmed, upon the single ground that the plaintiff has not shown who is the common ancestor through whom he claims title to the property i…
Cunningham, J.@mdashWe think that the appeal must be dismissed, on the ground that there is no sufficient reason shown for calling in question the deliberate conclusion at which the Magistrate has arrived. 2. With rega…