Found 0 result
Showing 1159771- 1159780 of 0 result for ""
1. This is a suit for determination of the title to, and possession of, moveable and immoveable property, and for setting aside an illegal adoption. The plaintiffs allege that their maternal grandfather Ramjiban being i…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThis case has been referred to a Full Bench by a Division Court, for the purpose of deciding whether this regular suit is maintainable. It appears that the plaintiff had purchased a ge…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThis case has been referred to a Full Bench for the purpose of deciding whether an appeal lies from an order made by the Judge, under sections 270 and 271 of Act VIII of 1859, with reg…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J., Steer, Kemp and Seton-Karr, JJ.@mdashThe plaintiff sued for rent at enhanced rates after notice. The suit was commenced on the 25th March 1859, before Act X of 1859 came into operation. Th…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J., Norman and Seton-Karr, JJ.@mdashThis was a suit instituted on the 21st of July 1858, for the mesne profits of 6025 bighas of land, of which the plaintiff recovered possession by a decree d…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J., Bayley and L.S. Jackson, JJ.@mdashThe question in this case was whether an appeal from a decision, passed under the provisions of section 28, Act X of 1859, lies to the Revenue Commissione…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt. C.J. 1. In this case the plaintiff sued to resume a lakhiraj tenure, u/s 28, Act X of 1859. Such a suit cannot be maintained upon the ground that the tenant holds under an invalid tenure, but ca…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIn this case the plaintiff sued upon an adjusted account. The first Court held that the plaintiff had proved the adjustment of the account. The Judge reversed that decision, upon the a…