Found 0 result
Showing 1160101- 1160110 of 0 result for ""
Trevor, J.@mdashBefore proceeding to answer these questions, it will be well to notice certain objections which have been taken to the form of the present action. An action for enhancement of rent, it has been contended…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe are of opinion that the Court of Wards was not prevented by Act XL of 1858 from taking an infant and his estate under their protection by reason of a certificate of administration g…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe think that the Judge of the Small Cause Court was right in this case; and we agree in opinion with the learned Judges who referred the question to a Full Bench. The case (1), which …
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashWe agree with E. Jackson, J., in this case. We think that there was no error in law, and that the Judge was not bound to grant a local investigation. The decree of the lower Court is a…
Norman, J.@mdashThis case having been re-argued before a Full Bench at the request of the respondent, and in pursuance of the permission given to that effect, I think that limitation will not apply to the claim of the p…
Trevor, J.@mdashThe plaintiff in this case was a sub-talookdar who held his tenure by virtue of a contract with his superior holder, the lakhirajdar. At the time at which that contract was entered into, which on the sta…
1. By the gradual encroachment of the river Pudda in former years, the village Koopodoba belonging to the plaintiff''s zamindary, and a part of the defendants'' village of Soldoba, were carried away. In subsequent years…
1. The question for us to determine is whether an appeal from a decision passed under s. 77 of Act X of 1859 in a suit for a sum in value less than Rs. 100 in amount, lies to the Judge. It is provided by the law just ci…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThis is an application to enlarge the time for filing an appeal against a decree, and not to lodge an appeal against an order rejecting a review of judgment, even if an appeal would li…
Norman, Officiating C.J. 1. The question is whether the plaintiff was entitled to be put in actual possession of his share in the dwelling-house. We think it quite clear that section 224 has no application to the prese…