Found 0 result
Showing 1159851- 1159860 of 0 result for ""
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J., Loch, Norman, Kemp, Macpherson and Markby, JJ.@mdashWhen this rule was moved for I expressed my views at length, not as binding upon me, in case I should be satisfied upon argument that I …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe are of opinion that the view taken by the Judge of the Small Cause Court was correct. In Bharut Chunder Dutt v. Dengar Gope the plaintiff was a surety, upon whose security milk was …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThe question which has been referred by the Small Cause Court Judge in this case is (reads). It is stated that the plaintiff, a co-sharer, deposited the revenue payable upon the whole …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashAccording to the case stated by the Judge, a suit was brought against twenty-three defendants (of whom the present plaintiff was one) for having wrongfully constructed a bandel and cau…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThe case has been fully argued before us, and we are of opinion that the judgment was not a judgment in rem, and that it was not admissible in evidence against the plaintiff. The petit…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., CJ. 1. The Judge in this case says that the dakhilas produced by the defendant are not anywhere denied by the plaintiff, and consequently, under the ruling in Kazee Khoda Newaz v. Nubokissore R…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe think that in this case the Judge had jurisdiction. S. 26, Regulation V of 1812, is in the following words: "Inconvenience to the public, and injury to private rights, having been e…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., CJ. 1. Several Regulations have been referred to. The first was Regulation VII of 1799, cl. 1, s. 15, of which declares that "any zamindar, talookdar, or proprietor, or farmer of land, to whom …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThe plaintiffs in this case were dispossessed under a sale in execution of a decree against Hurreeram and others. The plaintiffs'' property was not liable to be sold under that executi…