Kolkata Court December 1899 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.
Suja UddIn Vs. ReazuddIn and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-04-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal414
Rampini and Wilkins, JJ.1. A preliminary objection has been raised to the hearing of these two appeals. (Nos. 69 and 74 of 1899), namely, that no appeals lie; and in support of this contention the case of Raja Pudmanund Singh Bahadoor v. Doorga Pershad Doobey (1899) 4 C.W.N., 39, recently decided in this Court has been cited.. We think that the facts of the present appeals are similar to the facts of that, case, and on the authority of this ruling and also of the rulings Ningappa v. Sangawa (1885) I.L.R., 10 Bom., 433, and Raja v. Strinivasa (1888) I.L.R., 11 Mad., 319, we dismiss these appeals with costs, which we assess at two gold mohurs in each case....
Jawad Ali and anr. Vs. Hurnandun Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-01-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal468
Rampini and Wilkins, JJ.1. This is a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell 28 bighas of land for Rs. 1,200.2. The District Judge, reversing the decision of the Subordinate Judge, has found in favour of the plaintiff'.3. The defendants second party appealed.4. The facts as found by the District Judge are (1) that the defendant first party agreed to sell the land to the plaintiff for Rs. 1,200 on the 27th December 1895, and received Rs. 25 and executed a document exhibit (a); (2) the defendant first party then agreed to sell the same land to the defendants second party for Rs. 1,260, took Rs. 20 from them and executed a bainanamah on the 3rd January 1896; (3) the plaintiff before the registration of this bainanamah gave the defendants second party notice of his contract with the defendant first party; (4) notwithstanding this the defendant first party executed and registered a conveyance in favour of the defendants second party on the 9th January 1896.5. On these findings...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›