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.

Samarendra Chandra Deb Vs. Birendra Kishore

Samarendra Chandra Deb vs Birendra Kishore

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Aug 10, 1909
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/878684

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.

Privy Council Appeal - Application to High Court--Abatement of Appeal--Practice. -

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Samarendra Chandra Deb

Respondent

Birendra Kishore

Legal References

Cases Referred
Jadunundan Koer v. Ham Jibanlal
Reported In
4Ind.Cas.456

Excerpt

privy council appeal - application to high court--abatement of appeal--practice. - .....of the defendant to the raj of hill tipperah and rejected the memorial of the plaintiff for recognition as raja. the defendant now contends that by virtue of the recognition of the government of india he has become a sovereign prince and that the appeal can no longer be prosecuted against him. on behalf of the appellant, it has been contended that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this application. in view of the decision of this court in jadunundan koer v. ham jibanlal 10 c.l.j. 331; 4 ind. cas. 454 it is clear that it is competent to this court to deal with this application. the sole question is what order should be passed thereupon. the question raised is one of considerable importance and if this court directed the appeal to be taken off the file, it would be open to the appellant to apply for leave to appeal to his majesty in council against such order. it is, therefore, more convenient that the application should be considered by the judicial committee. the order will be that the application be transmitted to the judicial committee with a report that the facts stated therein appear to this court to be well founded.

Full Judgment

1. In this case the order for final admission has been made by this Court but the transcript of the record has not yet been sent to England. The respondent has now applied that the appeal may be directed to be taken off the file or in the alternative that the petition may be transmitted to their Lordships of the Judicial Committee for disposal. The circumstances under which this application has been made may be shortly stated. The plaintiff who is the appellant before the Judicial Committee sued the defendant who was then the duly appointed Jubaraj of the Gadi of Hill Tipperah for declaration that he himself by virtue of his previous appointment as Rom Thakur was entitled to the succession after the demise of the then Raja and that the defendant had no right of succession thereto. One of the objections taken to the maintenance of the suit was, that it was not competent to the Municipal Courts of British India to entertain a suit of this character in which the validity of an act of State by a Sovereign Prince was called in question. The suit was dismissed by the Court of first instance and this decision was affirmed on appeal to this Court. The plaintiff then obtained leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. During the pendency of this appeal, the father of the defendant the Maharaja of Hill Tipperah died on the 12th March 1909 and on the 3rd June following, the Government, of India recognised and sanctioned the succession of the defendant to the Raj of Hill Tipperah and rejected the memorial of the plaintiff for recognition as Raja. The defendant now contends that by virtue of the recognition of the Government of India he has become a Sovereign Prince and that the appeal can no longer be prosecuted against him. On behalf of the appellant, it has been contended that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this application. In view of the decision of this Court in Jadunundan Koer v. Ham Jibanlal 10 C.L.J. 331; 4 Ind. Cas. 454 it is clear that it is Competent to this Court to deal with this application. The sole question is what order should be passed thereupon. The question raised is one of considerable importance and if this Court directed the appeal to be taken off the file, it would be open to the appellant to apply for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council against such order. It is, therefore, more convenient that the application should be considered by the Judicial Committee. The order will be that the application be transmitted to the Judicial Committee with a report that the facts stated therein appear to this Court to be well founded.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial