Latest Judgements

Search & filter over 1,159,844 results

Filters

Reset filters

Found 0 result

Showing 1159731- 1159740 of 0 result for ""

Updated just now

In Re: J. Dacosta

Calcutta High Court

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIt is clear that we cannot, under the general powers vested in the Court by the Letters Patent, interfere by way of motion, and do indirectly that which we cannot do directly by way of…

In Re: Ramprasad Hazra

Calcutta High Court

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashI am of opinion that, if, in the course of hearing a suit, a Civil Court commits a party to the suit for trial on a charge of perjury or forgery, or directs that the case be made over …

In Re: Mirza Himmat Bahadur

Calcutta High Court Application for Review No. 273 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashS. 363 of Act VIII of 1859 enacts as follows:-- "No appeal shall lie from any order passed in the course of a suit and relating thereto prior to the decree; but if the decree be appeal…

Sheikh Inayet Hossein Vs Sarifunnissa

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 1990 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThe case is very clear. The Principal Sudder Ameen, in his first decision, held that. Regulation XVII of 1806 was promulgated in Sarun on 7th January 1807, and he dismissed the plainti…

Bhikha Chowdhry Vs Maharaja Maheswar Bax Sing Bahadur

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 645 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIt has been held in several cases that a deed of sale registered did not invalidate a prior unregistered mortgage under the provisions of Act XIX of 1843. There was a case of Dooleycha…

Nilmani Burnick Vs Puddo Lochan Chuckerbutty and Others

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 1678 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThe case of Ruttunmani Dasi v. Kalikissen Chuckerbutty W.R., Sp. No., p. 147 decided on 16th March 1864 does not govern this case. In that case no fraud or other misconduct of the part…

Maluk Chand Surma Vs Karlu Chandra Surma and Others

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 1978 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J. and Bayley, J.@mdashIt appears to me that this case is governed by the ruling in Kashinath Chatterjee v. Chandi Charan Banerjee See Kashi Nath Chatterjee v. Chandi Charan Banerjee, ante, p.…

Kashi Nath Chatterjee Vs Chandi Charan Banerjee

Calcutta High Court Special Appeal No. 870 of 1865

Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J. and Bayley, J.@mdashI am of opinion that verbal evidence is not admissible to vary or alter the terms of a written contract in cases in which there is no fraud or mistake, and in which the …