Found 0 result
Showing 1159621- 1159630 of 0 result for ""
1. The application for execution was certainly defective, the error being not merely one of form. So far as respondent''s claim to one-fourth, of thefuture profits of the zamindari was concerned, the decree in Original …
Prinsep and Ameer Ali, JJ.@mdashIn these cases the accused were charged under Sections 283 and 290, Indian Penal Code, that is to say, with doing an act which caused danger, obstruction or injury to any person in a publ…
1. As observed by the Calcutta High Court in Taylor v. The Collector of Purnea, I. L. R 14 C 423 the Collector is not competent to refer, and thejudge is not competent to decide, any question arising u/s 55 of the Act. …
1. As observed by the Calcutta High Court in Taylor v. The Collector of Purnea ILR 14 Cal. 423 the Collector is not competent to refer and theJudge is not competent to decide any question arising u/s 55 of the Act. The …
1. The learned judge of this Court is right. Plaintiff was only entitled u/s 14 of the Limitation Act to a deduction of the time between the institution ofthe suit and the disposal of the appeal against the order direct…
Prinsep and Ameer Ali, JJ.@mdashThis is a case under the Bengal Municipal Act of 1884, in which the accused has been convicted and sentenced to fine, u/s 344 of Bengal Act III of 1884, for having permitted his land to b…
1. The first contention raised by the appellants, both at the grant of sanction and at the hearing of the suit, was that the provisions of Act XX of1863 do not apply to the plaint temple. The District Judge overruled th…
1. The concurrent finding of both Courts that appellant has misappropriated Rs. 1,421 of the trust property is sufficient to support the decree forhis removal from the office of co-trustee with plaintiff. There is evide…
Muttusami Ayyar, J.@mdashMessrs. Alston Low and Co. plaintiffs, respondents, are merchants who carry on business as Commission Agents atTellicherry and elsewhere. Appellants, first and third defendants, are Mapilla merc…
Hobhouse, J. 1. The question in this case has come to a very simple point indeed after all this litigation. The estate is in Oudh, and was granted by the Crown to one Pirthi Pal after the confiscation, and it is place…