Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Beer Nursing Dutt

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Jun 24, 1897
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/861923

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Property;Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Taxation of costs - Discretion of Taxing Officer--Costs of Two Counsel--Insolvency Proceedings--Allegations of improper conduct--Purchaser. -

Key legal issue
Property;Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Beer Nursing Dutt

Legal References

Reported In
(1897)ILR24Cal891

Excerpt

taxation of costs - discretion of taxing officer--costs of two counsel--insolvency proceedings--allegations of improper conduct--purchaser. - jenkins, j.1. this application is by way of objection to the taxation of a bill of costs on the ground that the costs of a second counsel should not have been allowed. the case in which two counsel were employed was in certain insolvency proceedings and, as i learn from the statement of counsel, the. client by whom these counsel were employed was charged with collusion amounting to fraud.2. in the exercise of his discretion the taxing master considered that the case was one in which it was proper to allow the costs of a second counsel. i have been unable to see in the argument addressed to me anything to lead me to suppose that this discretion was wrongly exercised.3. i therefore hold that the objection was ill-founded, and the exceptions will be disallowed with costs.4. attorney for koosom koomary dassee: messrs. dignam & co.5. attorney for the creditors: babu g. c. dhur.c. e. g.

Full Judgment

Jenkins, J.

1. This application is by way of objection to the taxation of a bill of costs on the ground that the costs of a second Counsel should not have been allowed. The case in which two Counsel were employed was in certain Insolvency proceedings and, as I learn from the statement of Counsel, the. client by whom these Counsel were employed was charged with collusion amounting to fraud.

2. In the exercise of his discretion the Taxing Master considered that the case was one in which it was proper to allow the costs of a second Counsel. I have been unable to see in the argument addressed to me anything to lead me to suppose that this discretion was wrongly exercised.

3. I therefore hold that the objection was ill-founded, and the exceptions will be disallowed with costs.

4. Attorney for Koosom Koomary Dassee: Messrs. Dignam & Co.

5. Attorney for the Creditors: Babu G. C. Dhur.

C. E. G.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial