Kolkata Court November 1923 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.
Manindra Chandra Nandi Vs. Provas Chandra Mitter and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal761,79Ind.Cas.1042
Page, J.1. In this case the Maharajah of Cassimbazar applies by petition to the Court under Section 54 of the Specific Relief Act (Act 1 of 1877) for an order requiring the Returning Officer for the Presidency Landholders' Constituency to accept as valid the applicant's nomination as a candidate for election to the Bengal Legislative Council and to include the applicant's name in the list of valid nominations, and to publish it rectified as aforesaid, or, in the alternative, for a Rule upon the respondent to show cause why the said order or such further or other order should not be made as to the Court may seem fit and right, and for incidental relief.2. On the 15th of October Mr. Justice Cuming adjourned the hearing of this application until the 29th October, and granted ad interim injunction restraining the Returning Officer and other persons authorised to perform the functions of the Returning Officer from proceeding further with the election until the date fixed for the hearing of ...
Manindra Chandra Nandi Vs. Provas Chandra Mitter
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal279
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Maharaja Manindra Chandra Nandi of Cassimbazar from the judgment of my learned brother, Mr. Justice Page, which was delivered on the 2nd of November last.2. The notice of motion was in these terms: 'An application will be made before the vacation Judge for an order requiring the Returning Officer to accept the nomination of the applicant as valid and to include the applicant's name in the list of valid nominations and to publish the said list so rectified as aforesaid in such manner and in such time as to this Hon'ble Court may seem fit and proper, or, in the alternative for the issue of a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause within a time to be fixed by the Court why the said order or such further or other order or orders as may be deemed fit and proper should not be made'.3. The facts which it is necessary for me to state in this case are as follows: The Maharaja, apparently, on the 7th of October, had decided that he would stand ...
S.N. Halder Vs. S.N. Mallik and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal454
Sanderson, C.J.1. After stating the facts of the case His Lordship proceeded as follows:In my judgment this appeal must be dismissed on the following grounds:The application, upon which the rule was founded, was made under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act. It is not necessary for me to refer at any length to the provisions of that section as they are all well known and there have been many decisions in this Court in respect thereof. It is sufficient for me to say, in the first place, that the jurisdiction which is given to the Court under that section is a discretionary jurisdiction : and, in the second place, that jurisdiction is limited by the provisos and exemptions which are set out in the section. I desire to refer to three of these, viz., (d), (e) and (h). The section provides that the Court may ' make an order requiring any specific act to be done or forborne...by any person holding a public office...provided (d) that the applicant has no other specific and adequate legal r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›