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: Anonymous

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Jun 16, 1878
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/874654

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
Civil

Case Summary

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

Vakalatnama - Act VII of 1870, Article 10, Schedule ii--Act XVIII of 1869, Schedule ii. -

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Anonymous

Legal References

Reported In
(1878)ILR3Cal767

Excerpt

vakalatnama - act vii of 1870, article 10, schedule ii--act xviii of 1869, schedule ii. - richard garth, c.j.1. upon the question addressed to this court by the board of revenue of the north-western provinces on the 29th of march last, we are of opinion that if a pleader is authorized by the vakalatnama under which he acts to receive monies or documents for his client in the course of the cause, which he is empowered to conduct, or as a consequence of the decree or any order of the court in such cause, a court of justice might legally and with propriety direct a public officer to pay money or make over valuable documents to the pleader, provided that such money or documents have become receivable by the client in the ordinary course of the suit, or in consequence of the order or decree.2. the receipt of money or documents under such circumstances is one of those ordinary duties which pleaders are continually called upon to perform for their clients, and a vakalatnama properly framed generally contains a power to perform such duties.3. if, therefore, the legislature had intended that in every such case a general or special power-of-attorney should be necessary to enable the pleader to receive the money or documents, it may be assumed that they would have said so in express terms.

Full Judgment

Richard Garth, C.J.

1. Upon the question addressed to this Court by the Board of Revenue of the North-Western Provinces on the 29th of March last, we are of opinion that if a pleader is authorized by the vakalatnama under which he acts to receive monies or documents for his client in the course of the cause, which he is empowered to conduct, or as a consequence of the decree or any order of the Court in such cause, a Court of Justice might legally and with propriety direct a public officer to pay money or make over valuable documents to the pleader, provided that such money or documents have become receivable by the client in the ordinary course of the suit, or in consequence of the order or decree.

2. The receipt of money or documents under such circumstances is one of those ordinary duties which pleaders are continually called upon to perform for their clients, and a vakalatnama properly framed generally contains a power to perform such duties.

3. If, therefore, the Legislature had intended that in every such case a general or special power-of-attorney should be necessary to enable the pleader to receive the money or documents, it may be assumed that they would have said so in express terms.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial