Kolkata Court August 1906 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.
Dalgleish Vs. Damodar NaraIn Chowdhry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1906
Reported in: (1906)ILR33Cal1286
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 profi...
Gajhoo Damar Singh Vs. Jagat Pal Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1906
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.648
1. The plaintiff-appellant brought this suit for a declaration of his title to, and for confirmation of his possession in a tract of jungle land in which there was a small patch of arable land; or, if he was found to have been dispossessed, then for recovery of possession. The tract of land claimed was alleged to be included in the plaintiff's village of Jabkakona included in pergunnah Beru. Jabkakona lies immediately to the south of Serabera the village of defendant No. 1 in pergunnah Palkote. The boundary line of the two villages admittedly corresponds with the boundary line of the two pergunnahs.2. The cause of action was alleged to have arisen in 1900. In that year plaintiff leased out the jungle to Messrs. Dear and Co., the Company defendant 2nd party; and when the Company proceeded to cut down trees in the jungle and to make sleepers, men on behalf of defendant No. 1 came and carried off the sleepers : defendant 2nd party instituted a case in the Criminal Court but it was dismiss...
Mungle Chand Vs. Gopal Ram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1906
Reported in: (1907)ILR34Cal101
Sale, J.1. I think there is no reasonable doubt as to the course I ought to pursue. The plaintiff undoubtedly instituted the suit in this Court, subsequently to the suit filed by the defendant in Bareilly. On the other hand it is clear that very great hardship will accrue to the plaintiff, if this suit is tried at Bareilly. Practically all the accounts of the parties, the transactions in respect of which took place in Calcutta, would have to he taken in Bareilly. The plaintiff is a Commission agent, his books are here, his witnesses are here and it was intended that the goods sent by the defendant should be dealt with in Calcutta. Under these circumstances there is no doubt that the parties intended, and indeed justice requires, that the matters between them should be the subject-matter of a suit in this Court. The question is whether effect can be given to the requirements of justice by the stay of the suit in the Bareilly Court. I think the powers of this Court to grant temporary inj...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›