Dalgleish Vs. Damodar NaraIn Chowdhry

Dalgleish vs Damodar NaraIn Chowdhry

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Aug 14, 1906

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/862295

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/862295
Court: Kolkata
Judge: Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J. and ;Holmwood, J.
Decided On: Aug 14, 1906
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

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

Appeal to Privy Council - Cases in which appeal lies or not--Valuation of appeal--Value of the subject matter of the suit--Decree involving question to properly of appealable value--Claim for future mesne profits--Civil Procedure Code (Act XIV of 1882) Section 596. -

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dalgleish

Respondent

Damodar NaraIn Chowdhry

Legal References

Cases Referred: Mohideen Hadjiar v. Pitchey
Reported In: (1906)ILR33Cal1286

Excerpt

appeal to privy council - cases in which appeal lies or not--valuation of appeal--value of the subject matter of the suit--decree involving question to properly of appealable value--claim for future mesne profits--civil procedure code (act xiv of 1882) section 596. - .....ultimately successful.3. the plaintiffs, the present petitioners, have filed an affidavit, in which they have sworn (hat the mesne profits amount to a sum far exceeding rs. 10,000, and they have shown in detail how that amount is arrived at. the only way in which the other side meet those figures is by saying that the claim is 'preposterous.' they have, however, been in possession, and they have not shown how the claim is preposterous. in my opinion the plaintiffs are entitled to take into account their claim for mesne profits with a view to ascertaining whether the value of the matter in dispute reaches the statutory amount of rs. 10,000.4. i am fortified in this view by the decision of the judicial committee of the privy council in the case of mohideen hadjiar v. pitchey (1803) a.c. 103. there mesne profits for the period after the decree were allowed to be taken into account.5. anyway i think the decree involves, directly or indirectly, some claim or question to or respecting property of the value of rs. 10,000 or upwards, within the meaning of section 596 of the code.6. in either view it seems to me that the certificate must be granted.holmwood, j.7. i agree.

Full Judgment

Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J.

1. This is an application for a certificate that -the case is a fit one for appeal to His Majesty in Council. The only question is whether the amount or value of the matter in dispute amounts to Rs. 10,000.

2. The action was one for ejectment on the termination of certain leases and was brought very shortly after the termination of those leases. The property was valued at Rs 5,460, but in addition the plaintiff claimed mesne profits. Mesne profits, as we all know, are usually ascertained in execution proceedings in this country and in the proceedings in execution the plaintiff, who obtained a decree in the Court of the first instance, put in a claim for mesne profits for over Rs. 30,000. Nothing, however, was done as regards this claim as there was an appeal and the proceedings were stayed pending the appeal, which was ultimately successful.

3. The plaintiffs, the present petitioners, have filed an affidavit, in which they have sworn (hat the mesne profits amount to a sum far exceeding Rs. 10,000, and they have shown in detail how that amount is arrived at. The only way in which the other side meet those figures is by saying that the claim is 'preposterous.' They have, however, been in possession, and they have not shown how the claim is preposterous. In my opinion the plaintiffs are entitled to take into account their claim for mesne profits with a view to ascertaining whether the value of the matter in dispute reaches the statutory amount of Rs. 10,000.

4. I am fortified in this view by the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Mohideen Hadjiar v. Pitchey (1803) A.C. 103. There mesne profits for the period after the decree were allowed to be taken into account.

5. Anyway I think the decree involves, directly or indirectly, some claim or question to or respecting property of the value of Rs. 10,000 or upwards, within the meaning of Section 596 of the Code.

6. In either view it seems to me that the certificate must be granted.

Holmwood, J.

7. I agree.

Same Parties Dalgleish vs Damodar NaraIn Chowdhry Same Subject Civil Same Judge Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J. and ;Holmwood, J.

Civil