Privy Council Court February 1931 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.
Bhagat Singh and Others Vs. Emperor
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-27-1931
Viscount Dunedin: This case does not fall within the strict rule that has been again and again laid down that this Board does not and will not act as a tribunal of criminal appeal, because here the objection, if it were good, would go to the root of the jurisdiction. But it is subject to the ordinary criterion which is applied to all petitions for special leave to appeal, to wit, that leave will not be granted where upon the face of the application it is plain that on the merits it is bound to fail. Now the only case that is made here is that S. 72, Government of India Act, did not authorize the Governor-General to make the order he did constituting a special tribunal for the trial of the offenders, who, having been convicted, are now petitioners here. S. 72 is as follows: "72. The Governor-General may in cases of emergency make and promulgate ordinance? for the peace and good government of British India or any part thereof, and any ordinance so made shall for the space of not more tha...
Rai Rajendra Kumar Ghosh Bahadur and Others Vs. Rash Behari Mandal and ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-27-1931
Lord Blanesburgh: This is a plaintiffs' appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Port William, in Bengal reversing a decree of the Sub-ordinate Judge at Khulna and dismissing as against the respondents the appellants suit. The respondents appearing are 9 out of an original concourse of 414 defendants who at the commencement of the litigation on 30th April 1921 were so far as was physically possible, in occupation of an area of lands approximately 6,000 bighas in extent situate in the Collectorate of District Khulna in Bengal. The appellant's claim in the suit was to recover from the impleaded defendants khas possession of these lands. Their case in substance, it will suffice to state it in the barest outline, was that the respective interests of the defendants in the lands were no more than encumbrances within the meaning of S. 11, Bengal Regulation 8 of 1819 and that the appellants as auction-purchasers of the putni in which the 6,000 bighas were comprised had right to ...
Commissioner for Local Government Lands and Settlement Vs. AbdulhuseIn ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-27-1931
Lord Atkin: This is an appeal from an order of the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa, varying an order of the Supreme Court of Kenya, which dismissed a motion by the applicant Abdulhusein Kaderbhai for a mandamus addressed to the appellant, the Commissioner for Local Government Lands and Settlement in Kenya. The Commissioner had given notice of an auction sale of town plots at Mombasa at which Europeans only were to be allowed to bid and purchase. The notice contained the further special condition, that during the terms of the grant the grantee should not permit the dwelling house or outbuildings which had to be erected upon it to be used as a place of residence for any Asistic or African not a domestic servant employed by him. The applicant, who is an Indian subject of His Majesty resident in Mombasa on 10th August 1928, by notice of motion dated 9th August, moved the Court for a mandamus commanding the Commissioner to allow the applicant to bid for and purchase at the auction sale t...
Ram Krishna Muraji Vs. Ratan Chand and Another
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-27-1931
Sir Lancelot Sanderson: This is an appeal by the defendant idol through its manager, Ram Lal, against a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, dated 2nd April 1928, which reversed a decree, dated 31st January 1924 of the Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore. The suit was brought by Ratan Chand, a minor, under the guardianship of his mother, against the said defendant idol, and one Gulab Chand, for a declaration that a preliminary decree, dated 26th July 1922 (and the final decree, if any), in Suit No. 57 of 1922, in the Court of the First Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore, and decided by the Second Subordinate Jndge of the said Court, is invalid, null and void and ineffectual against the plaintiff, and that the property in dispute, viz,, a house in the city of Cawnpore, the subject-matter of a mortgage dated 5th December 1920, is not saleable in execution of the said decree. Gulab Chand did not defend the suit; the defendant idol filed a written statement and contested the plaintiff...
A Pleader Vs. the Judges of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-24-1931
Lord Macmillan: The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, on 25th June 1930, found the petitioner guilty of certain charges made against him under Art. 8, Letters Patent, of the Court, and ordered his name to be struck off the roll of vakils practicing before them. Ha now craves special leave to appeal against this order. At the conclusion of the hearing their Lordships intimated that they were unable to advise His Majesty that a case for special leave had bean made out and stated that they would embody their reasons in a written judgment. This they have now done. It appears that in 1929 a suit founded on two bonds was instituted in the Court of the Munsif of Banda at the instance of Samarjit Singh, a brother-in-law of the petitioner, against Dinkar Singh and another. While this suit was pending before the Munsif, Dinkar Singh presented an application to the High Court complaining of the conduct of the petitioner who, he alleged, had acted improperly in procuring the execution of the ...
Margaret Goonswardene Vs. Eva Moonemale Goonewardene and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-24-1931
Lord Russell of Killowen: The point for decision upon this appeal arises in the following circumstances. A testator made his will on 7th August 1913. It contained a disposition (hereinafter called the settled legacy) in the following words: I give and bequeath to my said wife all the moneys now invested by me on mortgage bonds or promissory notes and all cash in deposit to my credit in my No. 2 account in the Mercantile Bank of India Limited Galle subject to the direction that she is to have the interest derived therefrom up to the time of her death or remarriage as aforesaid. Thereafter the same shall vest absolutely in my said three nieces." He then made various bequests, including one which ran thus : " (g) The rest and residue of my cash found In my possession at the time of my demise and also the money in deposit to my credit in my No. 1 account in the Mercantile Bank of India Limited Galle, in the Bank of Madras Colombo, in the Government Savings Bank and in the Post Office Savin...
Mt. Munni Bibi and Another Vs. Tirloki Nath and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-24-1931
Sir George Lowndes: The property in dispute in this appeal is a house in Agra said to be worth Rs. 20,000. It has provided the parties with litigation for over forty years. It originally belonged to one Joti Pershad. On 27th January 1864, he executed a deed by which he purported to give it to his wife, Bibi Mukandi, but it is said that the gift was not perfected by possession. Joti Pershad died in 1870, and his two sons Bishamber Nath and Amar Nath succeeded to his property. If the house had been effectively transferred to Mukandi the sons clearly took no interest in it; but when they came to a partition in 1881 it was allotted to Amar Nath who lived in it till his death in 1884. Thereafter his widow, Hira Dei, continued to live in it till her death in April 1907 when, if it was the property of Amar Nath, it devolved on his daughter, the appellant, Munni Bibi. Mukandi died in 1891 and if the deed of gift was effective the house then passed as her stridhan to her two daughters. Batan De...
The Canadian Pacific Railway Company Vs. the King
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-19-1931
Lord Russell of Killowen: This appeal was brought against a judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada, which in part, dismissed the appellant's appeal, and in part allowed the respondent's appeal, from a judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada in proceedings, in which the Crown, on the information of the Attorney-General of Canada, was plaintiff, and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company (the appellant here) was defendant. The object of the proceedings was to obtain the removal from the roadway and lands of the Intercolonial Railway, of the appellant's line of telegraph poles and wires. The Intercolonial Railway forms part of the Canadian Government Railways system, and its roadway lies in the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The appellant's telegraph line was, at the date of the filing of the information (15th September 1926), substantially all erected upon and carried along the Intercolonial Railway's roadway. The telegraph line forms part of a telegraph system worked by t...
(Rai) Jatindra Nath Chowdhury Vs. Uday Kumar Das and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-16-1931
Lord Atkin: This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the High Court of Calcutta in a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover rent. There is also before their Lordships a petition by the defendant in two former appeals before this Board to reform the order in Council then made on the ground that it does not give effect to the intention of their Lordships as expressed in their judgment. These are the latest incidents in a series of legal proceedings which, owing mainly to the fault of the parties, have not had entirely satisfactory results. It will be necessary to state in outline so much of the previous history of the case as must be known to elucidate the present issue between the parties. In 1878 the predecessor-in-title to the plaintiff granted a lease to the predecessor of the defendant of a considerable portion of land estimated at about 4,000 bighas. The land was mainly uncultivated ; the tenant was to bring it into cultivation within three years. For that period he ...
(Valluri) Ramanamma Vs. Marina Viranna
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Feb-13-1931
Sir George Lowndes: In 1916 the appellant was entitled to certain immovable properties of considerable value, which had devolved upon her as her mother's stridhan. They were withheld from her by her brother, who was apparently a man of position and influence. Attempts had been made to settle the claim, but nothing was effected, and the period of limitation was approaching. It was accordingly decided that a suit must be instituted. The appellant was then 21 years of age and her husband, Pattabhiramaya, was 23 or 24. His father, Sattayya, was elderly and in bad health and was not prepared to take an active part in the litigation. Under these circumstances it was thought desirable to secure the assistance of the respondent the brother in-law of the appellant's husband, who was an older and more experienced man, and of considerable wealth. He was quite willing to assist gratuitously, but it was considered advisable that he should have a personal stake in the litigation and be legally bound...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »