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
Fowle Vs. Fowle
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal260
Jackson, Officiating C.J.1. This was a petition for is solution of marriage by a wife, Charlotte Rebecca Fowle, on the ground of adultery, cruelty, and desertion, filed under the Indian Divorce Act in the Court of the Recorder at Rangoon in British Burmah.2. The husband, Edward Fowle, as respondent, admitted the principal act of adultery or rather course of adulterous life charged, but denied the other adulteries, also the cruelty and the desertion. He avowed, however, that the petitioner had connived at the adultery which he admitted.3. The suit having come on for trial, the Recorder found that cruelty had not been committed, that the petitioner had not been deserted, that the adulteries charged previous to an adulterous connection with a Burmese woman, named Mahkin, had not been proved; but on the ground of the last-mentioned adultery, which had not been condoned, and as to which he found no connivance or acquiescence, he decreed a judicial separation with alimony, but dismissed the ...
Tag this Judgment!Muthora Nath Pal Vs. Chundermoney Dabia
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal817
Markby, J.1. (after stating the facts of the case, continued): The plaintiff has appealed. One ground taken in special appeal is, that the sale by the Court of Nuddea in execution of the decree of the Court of Hooghly could not transfer more than the rights and interests of the mortgagor: and that the Court of Hooghly had no jurisdiction to make a decree which would affect the rights of Chundermoney. But the Hooghly Court had jurisdiction to give a decree for the debt due under the mortgage-bond, and it had also jurisdiction to transfer that decree to any other Court for execution. So also the sale by the Court of Nuddea, to which the decree had been transferred, was perfectly regular; and I can see no objection to our dealing with this case precisely as if the property had been sold in execution of a decree of the Nuddea Court for the debt due under the mortgage-bond. What then would have been the effect of a sale in execution of such a decree of the Nuddea Court? It would, according ...
Tag this Judgment!The Agra Bank Limited Vs. Dhuronidhur Sen and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal380
Markby, J.1. The facts of this case are fully set out in the Judgment of Mr. Justice Mitter delivered in Court below. They are shortly as follows:One Brojonath having obtained a decree for damages against the executors of a surviving partner in an indigo concern, sold it to one Giridur, from whom it passed to the defendants. The executors then sold the indigo concern with dena and powna to the Agra Bank. In 1871 the then decree-hold or applied to the Court in which the decree was passed to substitute the Agra Bank in the place of the original judgment debtors. A notice was issued and duly served upon the Manager of the Bank, who did not think fit to appear upon the notice, and the application was granted.2. In December 1874 an application was made by the defendants to execute the decree against the Bank. The Bank then appeared to oppose the application, but execution was ordered to proceed. The Manager then applied to this Court under 24 and 25 Vict., c. 104, Section 15, to set aside t...
Tag this Judgment!Jallidar Singh Vs. Ram Lal and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal723
Jackson Officiating, C.J.1. The subject of this suit is a house in the City of Patna, which was the property of a Hindu named Gopi Sahu and his son Jhamak Sahu, who are governed by the Mitakshara law.2. One Musamut Rajo obtained a decree for money against Jhamak Sahu, and, in execution thereof, caused his right and interests in the property to be sold by auction. The defendant Ram Lal was the purchaser, and he obtained possession on the 21st May 1875. In the meantime, however, the plaintiff Jallidar Singh had, on the 15th of May, purchased the house from Gopi Sahu, the father, as belonging to him exclusively. He says he was dispossessed by the auction-purchaser, and sues to recover possession. It is not now contended that the house was the exclusive property of the father.3. The points urged in special appeal are, that though the son had an interest in the property, it was one that could not be transferred during his father's lifetime, and that even if saleable, the sale would not conf...
Tag this Judgment!The Empress Vs. Troyluckho Nath Chowdhry and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal366
Jackson, J.1. It appears to me that, under expl. 4 of the 108th section of the Indian Penal Code, the abetment of an abetment being an offence, and the prisoner having instigated Cummins to do that which, if committed, would have been an offence, he has himself thereby committed an offence, and inasmuch as by expl. 2, to constitute the offence of abetment it is not necessary that the act abetted should be committed, therefore the circumstance--that owing to the property being removed with the knowledge of the owner, the technical offence of theft had not been committed--does not save the prisoner from the consequence of the abetment which he has been guilty of and therefore he has been properly convicted.2. The prisoner will be brought up before the Magistrate for sentence.White, J.3. I agree in thinking that, upon the facts found by the Magistrate, the prisoner may be properly convicted of the offence of abetting an offence....
Tag this Judgment!Shoshi Mohun Pal Chowdhry and ors. Vs. Nobo Kristo Poddar and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal801
Mitter, J.1. In this special appeal it has been urged that upon the facts found, the ownership of the property, and consequently the risk passed to the defendants; that consequently, even if there was any breach of the warranty, the defendants could not rescind the sale under the contract law; that the defendants are, therefore, liable. An objection has also been taken to the finding of the lower Appellate Court, that it is not clear. It has been said that the District Judge having held that the sale was by sample, should have determined whether the quality of the rice in golah No. 4 was equal to that of the sample; instead of determining that question, he holds that the defendants brought only 'Chaitro Panchi Padi' of good quality, and the rice was not of that description.2. As regards this last contention, I do not think there is any force in it. What the District Judge holds is, that although the sale was by sample, yet having regard to the contract price and the prices of rice ruli...
Tag this Judgment!Mujeedunnissa Vs. Dildar HosseIn and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal629
Ainslie, J.1. The question raised in this appeal is one under the Limitation Act of 1871. A decree for possession of certain property and mesne profits was made on the 31st of January 1860. Execution was taken out in 1863, and possession was obtained, and a portion of the interest realized on the 6th March of that year. On the 3rd of March 1866, the judgment-creditor made a further application to the Court to determine the amount due to him as mesne profits, the question having been reserved under Section 197 in the original decree. An enquiry having been held, the judgment-debtor raised objections to the assessment proposed by the Ameen. Those objections were eventually disposed of by the first Court on the 29th of June 1869, and the order of that Court was confirmed on appeal on the 31st of August 1871. On the 25th of August 1874, the judgment-creditor applied to the Court to realize the amount due to him as mesne profits, and thereupon it was objected that this application was out o...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: C.M. Hunter; in Re: Xxviii Act of 1866
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal420
White, J.1. The Administrator-General of Bengal, who is the executor of the will of Charles Marley Hunter, applies, under Section 43 of Act XXVIII of 1866, for the opinion and direction of the Court touching the following bequest contained in the will:I bequeath to my daughter, Anne Margaret Hunter, on her attaining her 18th year, the sum of Co.'s rupees 10,000, with any interest that may have accrued thereon, if she marries, to be settled upon herself and children solely, should she die unmarried, her money to be equally divided between her brothers; and if either of them die, the whole of deceased's money to go to the survivor.2. The daughter was a minor at the date of the will and also of the testator's death. She is now about 24 years old, and unmarried. She claims to be entitled to the legacy absolutely, and to have the same, both principal and arrears of interest paid into her own hands by the Administrator-General.3. If I may read the bequest, affixing to the words employed thei...
Tag this Judgment!Aunath Nath Deb Vs. Bishtu Chunder Roy and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal783
Richard Garth, C.J.1. The point upon which in our opinion this case should be decided is rather of a peculiar nature.2. The plaintiff is the zamindar of a share in a property called Lat Sahalampore, and he also claims to be the darpatnidar of a portion of the same property.3. In his character of darpatnidar he brings this suit against the defendant No. 1, as ijaradar under him of part of the estate, for rent and for road-cess. The defendant resists the claim upon the ground that Paresh Nath, the defendant No. 2, is the real owner of the darpatni; and the defendant No. 2 has intervened for the purpose of supporting his title to the rent as against the plaintiff.4. It appears that some time ago, in the year 1259 (1852), one Isur Chunder purchased, and was the undoubted owner of, this darpatni estate.5. In the year 1265 (1858), Isur Chunder, being in difficulties, sold, or professed to sell, the darpatni to his wife Kripomoye and his son Dhankristo; and thereupon the names of Kripomoye an...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: in the Goods of J. White
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1879)ILR4Cal582
Pontifex, J.1. Granted the order....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- Next ›
- Last »