Found 0 result
Showing 1157601- 1157610 of 0 result for ""
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashIn our opinion Section 188 applies to orders made by public functionaries for public purposes, and not to an order made in a civil suit between party and party; so we think the Magistrate was ri…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashWe think that there is no ground either for setting aside or for staying the criminal proceedings. 2. We consider that the Full Bench decision of this Court in In the matter of the Petition of …
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashThe first ground upon which it is contended that the order is bad is, that the Judge of the Pubna Court had no jurisdiction to make it. 2. Upon this ground alone it appears to me that the order…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashWe are of opinion that the conviction of Shunker Gope, for an offence u/s 411 of the Penal Code, is legal, and that we should not interfere. Shunker Gope confessed to having stolen cattle in the…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdash(who, after setting out the facts as above, continued):-I think that the District Judge was wrong in admitting the parol evidence; he appears to have admitted it under proviso 3 to Section 92 of…
Tottenham, J.@mdashThe point pressed upon us by the learned Counsel for the appellant is, that there is nothing in the law of this country warranting forfeiture of his holding as the penalty of denial by a ryot of his l…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashPontifex and Mitter, JJ.,--We think we are bound to follow, in its integrity, the rule which has been laid down by their Lordships of the Privy Council in the cases referred to, and adopted by t…
Field, J.@mdashIn this case the plaintiff sued to recover possession of two plots of land. As to the second plot I see no reason to interfere with the decree of the Munsif, confirmed by the Subordinate Judge, which decl…
Richard Garth, C.J.@mdashThe facts, which have been disclosed at the trial before Mr. Justice WILSON, present this case to us in a very different aspect from that which it assumed in the plaint. 2. The sale by the Sher…
Prinsep, J.@mdashThe only point raised by the defendant, special appellant before us, is, that, by reason of his being an adopted, and not a naturally begotten, son of Brojo Nath Roy, the plaintiff is no heir to Gour Ki…