Kolkata Court July 1878 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The Empress Vs. Hary Doyal Karmokar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1878
Reported in: (1879)ILR4Cal16
Markby, J.1. The Deputy Magistrate, Moulvie Abdool Guffoor, discharged the accused; but, on the application of the complainant, the District Magistrate has committed him to the Court of Session, notwithstanding that objection to his jurisdiction was raised. The Magistrate appears to have considered that he had jurisdiction, because, this being a case regarding an offence triable by the Court of Session as well as by a Magistrate, ho could act under s.296 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The Sessions Judge has referred the case to have this commitment set aside as illegal.3. The grounds on which the Magistrate held that he could re-open this case are bad, as it has been held that the term 'Sessions case' in Section 296 means a case triable exclusively by the Court; of Session. But we think that the commitment should be maintained on another ground.4. The Deputy, Magistrate discharged the accused without examining the principal witness in the case, the woman who was alone present in ...
Mahomed Badsha Vs. Nicol Fleming and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-1878
Reported in: (1879)ILR4Cal355
Pontifex, J.1. In this case Messrs. James Nicol, Fleming & Co., of Calcutta, purchased from one Pestonjee Eduljee a cargo of rice at Chandbally of three different qualities according to sample. A few days afterwards Messrs. Nicol, Fleming & Co. telegraphed to the plaintiff at Madras an offer to sell to him a cargo of rice, which was then at Chandbally by description; and that offer was accepted also by telegram. Two days after the sending of the telegram, Nicol, Fleming, & Co. sent down to Madras three samples of the rice comprised in the cargo, and the samples were received by the plaintiff and were not objected to as differing in any way from the descriptions under which the rice had been sold under the telegram. Subsequently, on arrival of the cargo at Madras, the plaintiff complained that the rice in bulk did not correspond with the samples, and a survey was hold, and in fact the whole dispute in the suit between the plaintiff and Nicol, Fleming as shown by the plaint, appears to m...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›