Privy Council Court November 1941 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.
Kedar Nath Goenka Vs. Maharaj Kumar Babu Rageswari Prasad Singh and Ot ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-18-1941
Reported in: AIR1942PC30
LORD ATKIN: Their Lordships do not find it necessary to hear counsel for the respondents in this case. These are appeals from decrees of the High Court at Patna, which reversed decisions of the Subordinate Judge on two matters which arose under these circumstances : In 1901, a certain property in Bihar was sold by the Collector for arrears of land revenue. It belonged to the respondents or their predecessors. There being an irregularity in the sale, the present appellant, whose father had been the purchaser, by a decree which was given in a suit against him for possession was compelled to surrender the property. In that suit possession was decreed and mesne profits were assessed by the Subordinate Judge. He assessed the mesne profits at a particular rate and he gave interest at 12 per cent. throughout. There was an appeal from that decision and the High Court increased the amount of the mesne profits, but they decreed that interest should be at 12 per cent, up to the date at which poss...
State Aided Bank of Travancore, Ltd., Vs. Dhrit Ram
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-06-1941
LORD ATKIN: This is an appeal by the defendants from a decree of the Appellate Division of the High Court of Bombay affirming a decree of Wadia J. in the High Court in favour of the plaintiff. The dispute involves a relatively simple question arising in the business of banking. The defendants, who will be called hereafter the bank, are a company incorporated according to the laws of the State of Travancore and apart from a branch office in the State of Cochin have their head and only office at Alleppey in that State. They have no branches elsewhere. In September 1936, the plaintiff, who resided and was in permanent employment in Bombay, wrote to the bank at Alleppey asking for the rate of interest allowed on fixed deposit. On 5th September 1936, the Bank wrote back stating that their present rates of interest for deposits of six months, one year, and two or more years were 4 per cent., 5 per cent., and 5 per cent., respectively. Remittance may be made towards credit of our account with...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›