Found 0 result
Showing 1163321- 1163330 of 0 result for ""
Norman, J.@mdashThe defendant in this case is a breeder of horses, and this suit is brought to recover possession of about 30 bigas of land in Basdeopur, occupied by the defendant for grazing purposes and as part of an …
Markby, J.@mdashIn this case the plaintiff brought a suit to recover an alleged loan of Rs. 1,000 upon a bond said to have been executed by one Mohan Chandra Sen, as mooktear on behalf of the defendant. The defendants d…
Norman, J.@mdashThe question I have to consider is whether, under Hindu law, on the death of Pyari Mani, the estate of Deochandra vested absolutely in Gurudas, so as to exclude any after-born son of Bireswar; or whether…
Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashThis case has been very ably argued on both sides. It appears to me that the judgment of the Court of original jurisdiction ought to be affirmed. There is no doubt that, according to the H…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIt appeals to me that this case is different from that of Hale v. Rawson (4 C.B.N.S., 85), inasmuch as in that case the contract was not to sell tallow to arrive by the Countess of Elg…
Hobhouse, J.@mdashIn this case the plaintiff sued for possession of a certain property. He alleged that sometime previous to the year 1256 (1849) this property was held by one Shib Chandra Sarma and the Sanna defendants…
1. In this case the plaint is brought against the Ranis, or the wives of the late Raja Chatpal Sing, and also against the minor son and heir of the said Raja, who is made a party to the suit. The plaint expressly states…
Sir Barnes Peacock, Kt., C.J.@mdashIt appears to us that the deed in question demised the land, as well as the bungalow which was standing on it, and consequently that the deed was not admissible in evidence without reg…
Hobhouse, J.@mdashIn these cases the important facts are as follows:--One Manikarnika obtained a decree for Rs. 812 odd, for arrears of rent, against Taramani Chowdhrain, the plaintiff, respondent in No. 2393, and certa…