Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Baso Kooer and ors. Vs. Hurry Dass and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal495
Mitter, J.1. The plaintiffs in these two suits are members of a joint family of which Chumun Lal was the common ancestor. Chumun Lal left six sons him surviving, viz., Behari Lal, Kanhya Lal, Sheo Lal, Domun Lal, Shoukhi Lal and Amrit Lal; but Amrit Lal may be left out of consideration, as he died without issue leaving a widow Radha Kooer. There was a question raised in the lower Court as to the date of the death of Chuman Lal, but the lower Court has found that it took place in 1262 (1855). We concur in this finding. Of the descendants of the surviving five sons of Chuman Lal, it is sufficient for our purpose to state that Behari Lal had three sons, viz., Bhowani Pershad, Peary Lal and Gopal Lal, and that Sheo Lal had a son named Durga Pershad. In the suit out of which appeal No. 60 arises, the plaintiffs are the widow and sons of Kanhya Lal, and the sons and wives of Bhowani Pershad, of Gopal Lal and of Domun Lal. In the other suit the plaintiffs are sons of Shoukhi Lal, sons and wif...
Tag this Judgment!Lutchmeeput Singh Vs. Sadaulla Nushyo and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal698
Mitter, J.1. The plaintiff is the patnidar of Pergunnah Batasone. The defendants Nos. 1 to 9 are the inhabitants of Roopsi, the defendants Nos. 10 and 11 are the inhabitants of Joroollahpore, and the defendants Nos. 12 and 13 are the inhabitants of Manipore. The villages of Roopsi, Joroollahpore and Manipore appertain to the zamindari of Pergunnah Batasone.2. The plaintiff brought this suit praying for an injunction against the defendants to restrain them from fishing in certain bhils set out in the schedule to the plaint, and for a declaration that they had no right of fishing in the aforesaid, bhils.3. The grounds of action stated in the plaint are, that the bhils in question appertain to the zamindari of Pergunnah Batasone, of which the plaintiff is the patnidar; that the plaintiff is in possession of the fishery right in the said bhils; that out of these bhils, bhils Kendra and others, named in the second paragraph of the plaint, were let out in ijara to Kholie Mahomed and Deve Nus...
Tag this Judgment!Thomas Short and ors. Vs. Jane Pickering
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad138
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and Muttusami Ayyar, J.1. There is no provision in the Procedure Code authorizing the Court to allow a lien for wages on the assets of a judgment-debtor,2. We are, therefore, reluctantly compelled to vary the order of Judicial Commissioner as regards Rs. 317-9-1, wages due before the appointment of the receiver; but, in other respects, we shall, affirm it.3. The receiver at first accepted the., services of the respondent and did not vary the terms of her engagement. She is entitled to receive in 'full put of the estate the wages earned by her and the bonus to which she became entitled by reason of her summary dismissal. She is also entitled to be paid the sums expended by her in carrying on the-business under the receiver.' '.'''4. The order will be varied accordingly, and each party will pay his and her costs of this application....
Tag this Judgment!Janoki Debi Vs. Gopal Acharjia Goswami and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal766
R. Couch, J.1. The appellant in this case brought a suit to recover possession of certain properties which she alleged in the plaint to be partly brahmottar and partly debattar, the latter being dedicated to certain deities of the names of Keshab Rai and others, and also for the possession of the deities themselves from the hands of the first defendant, Sri Gopal Acharjia Goswami. Although the plaintiff described part of the properties claimed as her own brahmottar, which had devolved upon her by right of inheritance, it appeared on the hearing before the first Court, and was admitted by both parties, that the whole of the properties claimed belonged to the deities.2. The plaintiff's case was that the properties were in the possession of Lakhan Acharjia Goswami as sebait of the idols; that he having no son of his body, took the plaintiff's husband, Bijai Lakhan Acharjia, in adoption, and died in October or November 1859; that Bijai Lakhan being then a minor, his mother took possession ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramapa Vs. Umanna
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Bom123
Charles Sargent, Kt., C.J.1. The, plaintiff seeks to recover possession of the half of two survey Nos. 796 and 787 in Honvad village in the Bijapur Taluka and for Rs. 200 mesne profits. It is not disputed that the land, No. 796, was mortgaged in 1874 with possession to the plaintiff and defendant jointly to secure Rs. 500, with an agreement that if the mortgage was not paid off in five years the survey Nos. 796 and 787 should be entered in the khata of plaintiff and defendant jointly.2. Defendant's case is that plaintiff was paid Rs. 250 by the mortgagor as his share of the mortgage money before the expiration of the five years, and that, on payment of Rs. 900 by him to mortgagor, the lands were entered in his name, the mortgager giving up all interest in the land. A receipt by plaintiff for Rs. 250 on account of the mortgage debt was tendered in evidence by defendant, and objected to on the ground of its not being registered. The Assistant Judge admitted it on the authority of Shidlin...
Tag this Judgment!Uggur Roy and ors. Vs. Jullessur Kooer
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal725
Mitter, (Offg.) C.J.1. This suit relates to the estate left by one Sheo Prosad Roy, who died in Assar 1270 (June 1863). It is admitted by the contending parties that on Sheo Prosad's death his estate devolved upon his widow, Sunder Kali Kooer, under the Mitakshara law of inheritance which governs the family. Sunder Kali died in 1271, (1864) and the estate then devolved upon Komla Kooer, the mother of Sheo Prosad Roy. The dispute which led to the institution of this suit arose on the death of Komla Kooer, which took place on the 26th Assin 1286 (11th October 1879). The plaintiffs are the male gotraja sapindas of Sheo Prosad, descended from his great-grandfather, and the t defendant, who is in possession of the estate in question, is his sister. The plaintiff's contention is, that under the Mitakshara law the sister is not in the line of heirs at all. If this contention be correct then there cannot be any question that the decree of the lower Court in favour of the plaintiffs is correct....
Tag this Judgment!Koonjo Behary Roy Vs. Poorno Chunder Chatterjee
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal450
Richard Garth, C.J.1. We think that the learned Judge is quite right.2. Under Section 32 of the Rent Law a gomashta has no right to bring a suit in his own name. He can only sue in the name of his employer, and conduct the suit for him like any other agent.3. It has been contended, indeed, that he did bring this suit as agent, and that the plaint should be read in that sense; but it is difficult so to construe the language, and when we look at the verification of the plaint, it is clear that the gomashta describes himself, and not his employer, as the real plaintiff.4. This appeal must, therefore, be dismissed with costs....
Tag this Judgment!Noyna Misser and anr. Vs. Rupikun and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal609
Wilson, J.1. We think that this appeal should be dismissed. Two points have been discussed before us: First, whether the Judge in the lower Appellate Court was right or not in overruling so much of the decree of the Court of First Instance as granted to the plaintiffs a decree evicting the defendants. As to that we feel no hesitation; no authority has been cited to us, nor any reasoning satisfactory to our minds tending to show that where a tenant has been guilty of a breach of duty in the use of his land, such as making a tank in it, building on it improperly, or changing the character of the cultivation, this operates necessarily as a forfeiture and renders him liable to be evicted. On this point, therefore, we fully agree with the lower Appellate Court. The second question is one of much greater difficulty, and that is whether the lower court, ought not at the same time to have given them a decree granting an injunction against the future use of the land by the defendants in the way...
Tag this Judgment!Dassorathy Huri Chunder Mahapattra Vs. Rama Krishna Jana and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal526
Prinsep, J.1. We think that the conclusion arrived at by the lower Appellate Court is correct.2. Any acts of one or more of several joint tenants which possibly might operate as a forfeiture of tenancy, would not entitle the landlord to exact that penalty as against all the tenants; moreover the plaintiff zamindar's case has throughout been that the tenure cannot be split up by any arrangement among the tenants as between themselves, and that he is not bound to, and will not acknowledge the validity of, any such arrangement by which separate specific rights are created.3. We cannot now allow him in second appeal to alter his case and to claim a forfeiture on any specific shares of the joint tenancy so as to entitle him to recover khas possession of those shares. The landlord's appeal must therefore be dismissed.14. The appeal of the assignee of the rights of some of the sharers must also be dismissed, as it has been found on the authority of reported cases that the alienation of a tenu...
Tag this Judgment!Kalu Vs. Kashibai Alias Lakshmibai and ors.
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Bom127
Charles Sargent, Kt., C.J.1. The District Judge has found that there was no ancestral property in the family of the respondent's deceased husband, and that the property which his father Kalu now possesses is exclusively his own self-acquired property. The question for our consideration is Whether, under these circumstances, the widow and her infant sons, who are admittedly in indigent circumstances, have any legal claim to be supported by the appellant.2. The legal obligation of a father-in-law to support the widow of his deceased son came before a Divisional Bench of this High Court, consisting of Mr. Justice West and Mr. Justice Nanabhai, in Udaram Sitaram v. Sonkabai 10 Bom. H.C. Hep. 483. The facts of the case are unfortunately not stated by the Reporter as fully as might be wished, nor do the judgments delivered by the Court enable us to ascertain them with certainty. Mr. Justice West having stated the question to be whether there was a legal obligation on the part of the father-i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 150
- 151
- 152
- 153
- 154
- 156
- 157
- 158
- 159
- 160
- Next ›
- Last »