Found 0 result
Showing 1159441- 1159450 of 0 result for ""
Kemp, J.@mdashThe decision of the Judge in this case is clearly wrong. The plaintiff''s cause of action did not arise from the date of his purchase of the decree, but from the data of the order of the Collector referrin…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThis is a suit brought by Thomas Barlow of Manchester, a merchant trading under the style of Thomas Barlow and Brother, against Mr. Cochrane, the Official Assignee, as assignee of the …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashAbout 14 years and 3 months ago the plaintiffs obtained a decree, and we are now engaged in discussing whether they are barred by limitation from executing it. It appears that, from 18…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashI think that the decision of the Judge is right, and that what the plaintiffs recovered was a share of an undivided estate; and, consequently, that they were not entitled to be put int…
Phear, J.@mdashAs the plaintiff''s purchase was effected on the 13th of March after the attachment was issued, and before his Vendor''s application for a new trial on the 4th of July, it was evidently made while the att…
Phear, J.@mdashThe plaintiff''s cause of action in this suit is, that he is entitled to obtain certain property, which belonged to Kadam Lal, in consequence of Kadam Lal''s widow having forfeited her right to the enjoym…
1. This is an appeal from a decision of the High Court at Calcutta, which reversed the decree of the Judge of the Zilla Court of Nuddea, dismissing the plaintiff''s (the respondent''s) suit with costs. The suit which is…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashLooking at this case from beginning to end, I should scarcely have thought it possible that there could be such a casein existence. It appears that Gurudas Roy, the respondent in this …
1. This case, when divested of all that which is not material to the question before this Board, may be stated as follows:-- The appellants, two sisters, who had married individuals of the same family, became entitled, …