Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 47Ind.Cas.138
1. This Rule is directed against an order by which on the 20th of August 1917 the Munsif of Netrakona, exercising Small Cause Court powers, dismissed a suit brought by the plaintiff-petitioner.2. It appears that the plaintiff engaged the services of a 'Ghatu', or dancing and singing boy, for a period of 3 months at Rs. 35 a month. He next contracted with the principal defendant that for one month for a payment of its. 45 the boy should give exhibitions in accordance with arrangements made by the defendants. The defendants in fact detained the boy for a period of 1 month and 24 days. After crediting a payment of Rs. 6 the plaintiff now sues the defendants to recover a sum of Rs. 76-8-0 at the agreed rate of Rs. 45 a month.3. The Small Cause Court Judge finds all the facts in favour of the plaintiff, bat dismisses the suit on the ground that the contract between the plaintiff and the defendants was contrary to public policy. In coming to this conclusion he appears to have been influenced...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 46Ind.Cas.719
1. In this case we do not think that the proceedings have been conducted quite fairly to the first party. The proceedings were drawn up on 29th December 1917, 16th January being fixed as the date of the hearing. By that order the land was attached. The first party was not served, at any rate, until 8th January, so that more than half the time which was fixed by the order drawing up the proceeding had elapsed before he got notice of it. On the 16th the Mukhtar for the first party applied for time for his client to file his written statement. That was refused and the case went practically ex parte except for the cross-examination of some of the second party's witnesses by the Mukhtar. There was no immediate hurry in this matter, inasmuch, as the land was under attachment and, therefore, there was no immediate prospect of a breach of the peace. It may be noted that the Police report was in favour of possession of the first party: the order has given it to the second party. We think that t...
Tag this Judgment!