Found 0 result
Showing 1159061- 1159070 of 0 result for ""
Bayley, J.@mdashThis was a suit to recover a moiety of certain talook, and to recover moveable property scheduled at the foot of the plaint, to the value of Rs. 7,260-7 as. The only items in the schedule necessary to me…
L.S. Jackson, J.@mdashIn this case the suit was brought against one Shama Charan, who, it appears, is the son of Prem Chand. Judgment being given for the plaintiff, Prem Chand came to the Judge''s Court, and preferred a…
Hobhouse, J.@mdashIn this case, the plaintiff sued for a certain share in certain lands on the following allegations:--He said that the lands in question belonged as a whole originally to one Bijyanarayan Chowdhry. This…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIn this case the plaintiff sued to recover a yearly palla, or turn of worship, in the month of Bhadra, immediately following that of Mahesh Chandra and others. His claim was founded on…
L.S. Jackson, J.@mdashThis case is very clear. The plaintiff alleges that she had paid the rent to the zamindar''s gomasta or agent. Subsequently a suit was brought against her by the zamindar, and she was compelled to …
L.S. Jackson, J.@mdashIt seems to me quite clear, that, under the circumstances of this case, the Subordinate Judge was right in refusing to allow the demolition of the buildings in question. I am at a loss to understan…
Phear, J.@mdashI think that, if the wife is living apart from her husband under such circumstances that she does not pledge her husband''s credit, the Court ought not to grant alimony. But I will grant time to the wife …
L.S. Jackson, J.@mdashThis was a suit originally brought by Jageswar Roy Mahapatar against Damudar Das, and also against Bansi Dhar Roy and others, his allegation being that he, the plaintiff, and Bansi Dhar being joint…
Mitter, J. 1. We are of opinion that this suit is barred by section 7, Act VIII of 1859. The test in all cases of this description is whether the cause of action upon which the new suit is brought is distinct from th…
Bayley, J.@mdashWe are of opinion that the judgment of the lower appellate Court in this case must be reversed, and the case remanded to that Court for re-trial. The facts are these:--The plaintiff sued for opening a ro…