Latest Judgements

Search & filter over 1,159,844 results

Filters

Reset filters

Found 0 result

Showing 1158711- 1158720 of 0 result for ""

Updated just now

In Re: Gabinda Chandra Ghose and Anothers

Calcutta High Court

Glover, J.@mdashThis is a referenda made by the Sessions Judge of Jessore to have a certain in order passed under s. 218 of Act XXV of 1861 by the Deputy Magistrate of that district quashed. The only substantial ground …

In Re: S.J. Leslie

Calcutta High Court Rule Nisi No. 767 of 1872

Ainslie, J.@mdashWe held at the former hearing that the Judge had jurisdiction to ascertain the debt due by the petitioner to the Land Mortgage Bank, and to make an order for the sale of the mortgaged property which is …

Nuthoo Lall Chowdhry and Others Vs Shoukee Lall and Others

Calcutta High Court Regular Appeal No. 177 of 1871

Sir Richard Couch, Kt., C.J.@mdashOn the 11th of Jeit 1271 (1st June 1864), a bond was given by the defendants Domun Lall and Bhawani Pershad to the plaintiffs, the bond reciting that the parties had taken a loan of Rs.…

In Re: Bykuntram Shaha Roy and Others

Calcutta High Court

Sir Richard Couch, Kt. C.J. 1. The question referred to the Full Bench is (reads). We are of opinion that this question ought to be answered in the affirmative. S. 63 of Act XXV of 1861 runs as follows (reads). The abo…

Joy Koomar Dutta Jha Vs Esharee Nund Dutta Jha

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 265 of 1872

Kemp, J.@mdashA preliminary objection has been made by the Advocate-General, who appears for the special respondent, to the hearing of this appeal. He contends, first, that an order rejecting an application for the admi…

Hurrychurn Surmah Vs Poorno Singh Monipooree and Others

Calcutta High Court Regular Appeal No. 204 of 1871

Sir Richard Couch, Kt., C.J.@mdashIn the first of these appeals Poorno Singh, Goona Singh, and Jadab Singh, Monipoorees, the defendants, Nos. 2, 13, and 38 in the original suit, are the appellants, and the principal abj…

H. Clarton Vs D.N. Shaw and Another

Calcutta High Court

Sir Richard Couch, Kt., C.J.@mdashIt being stated that the Statute of Frauds does not apply, we are of opinion that the plaintiff was at liberty to prove by parol evidence the existence and terms of a contract on which …