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
Tekait Chooramun Singh Vs. Dunraj Roy
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal56
Mitter, J.1. This is a suit for arrears of rent at an enhanced rate. The rate at which the defendant pays being Rs. 3 per biga, the plaintiff in this action seeks to raise it to Rs. 5.2. The plaintiff also prays for ejectment of the defendant from the tenure and recovery of damages for non-payment of rent. The Court of first instance decreed the claim in full, but on appeal, that decree has been reversed by the Judicial Commissioner, and the plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.3. Concurring with the Assistant Commissioner, the Judicial Commissioner finds that the prevailing rate of rent in the neighbourhood is Rs. 5. Nevertheless he has dismissed the suit, because he is of opinion that the defendant's father excavated a tank in 1842, and constructed an ahir, or reservoir, in 1861, and that the productive powers of the land in suit have been thus increased by the agency and expense of the defendant's father.4. Furthermore he says,--'Almost all the witnesses for plaintiff, who say tha...
Tag this Judgment!Gourah Koeri Vs. Gujadhur Purshad
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal219
Mitter, J.1. One Khoonjo Behary died on the 7th June 1878, leaving him surviving two sons, Gujadhur and Kanny, and his widow Musst. Gourah Koeri. Gujadhur and Kanny are step-brothers, Kanny's mother being Gourah Koeri, and Gujadhur's mother had predeceased her husband. Gujadhur had attained majority before his father's death, and Kanny is still a minor. These three appeals arise out of three applications made to the lower Court. Two of these, by Gujadhur and Musst. Gourah Koeri, respectively, were made for obtaining certificates under Act XXVII of 1860 to collect the debts due to the estate of the deceased Koonjo Behary. The third application was made by Gourah Koeri to obtain a certificate under Act XL of 1858 for the administration of her minor son's property.2. The District Judge has granted to Gujadhur a certificate under Act XXVII of 1860 to collect the debts due to his father's estate, and has rejected both the applications of Musst. Gourah Koeri.3. Upon the evidence it appears t...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Mal Vs. Kooer NaraIn Mytee
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal251
Mitter, J.1. We think that, upon the facts stated in the petition, the applicant is not entitled to a certificate under Act XXVII of 1860. The petition is based upon an unoomoti puttro alleged to have been executed by Juggunauth Mal on the 23rd Assin 1270 (8th October 1863), he having died in Falgoon (March 1864) of that year, and if this unoomoti puttro be a genuine document, the estate of Juggunauth vested in the applicant as soon as he was taken in adoption.2. The present application is made to collect the debts due in respect of the properties left by Juggunauth while they were under the management of the alleged adoptive mother Doorgamonee. The petitioner cannot possibly have a locus standi under the provisions of Act XXVII of 1860. The Act applies to cases where applications are made by representatives of deceased Hindus, Mahomedans, and others not usually designated as British subjects, to collect the debts which are payable in respect of the estates of such deceased persons. In...
Tag this Judgment!Bhokteram Vs. Heera Kolita
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal184
Ainslie, J.1. The prisoner in this case laid an information at the police thanna against Sadheram, Bhokteram, and two others, stating that he suspected them of committing a robbery in his house. The police officer investigated the case, and being of opinion that the information was false, so reported to the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner on the report passed an order of dismissal, purporting to do so under Section 147 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This the Assistant Commissioner should not have done; no complaint had been made to him by the present prisoner, nor could the report of the police officer be regarded as a complaint for this purpose, for he had reported that the information was false. Bhokteram then applied to the Assistant Commissioner for leave to prosecute the prisoner under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code.2. No such leave or sanction was necessary; the offence, if there was one, was not committed before any Court; see Section 468| of the Crimin...
Tag this Judgment!Juggernath Sahoo and ors. Vs. Judoo Roy Singh and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal329
Ainslie, J.1. The final order in the suit, out of which the present case arises, was made by Her Majesty in Council. Under Section 610 of the Civil Procedure Code the decree-holders were bound to produce a certified copy of the final order when they applied for execution. It is no doubt true, as pointed out by the respondents' pleader, that the formal order of Her Majesty in Council is drawn up in the terms of the recommendation of the Judicial Committee in their judgment, but such recommendation cannot be taken to be the decree or order referred to in Section 610.2. Before the decree-holders can proceed with the execution of their decree in this case, it will be necessary for them to take steps to obtain a copy of the order of Her Majesty in Council. As to the costs of this appeal, the appellants are not entitled to them. On a former occasion, proceedings taken by the respondents for the purpose of enforcing their claim were stopped on the objection of the appellants, that it was nece...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Hari Chuckerbutty Vs. Kallida Pershad Dutt
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal317
Ainslie, J.1. We think that the Judge is right in the view he took of the question of limitation.2. The suit as framed was not one coming under the provisions of Section 27 of the Rent Law. The zamindar appears not to have come forward in his own name to interfere with the cultivation of one of his tenants, but to have proceeded by the agency of other persons, who now say he had given a lease without notice to the plaintiff. Where a landlord does not directly take steps to interfere with the rights of cultivation of his tenant, but does so through other persons, whose acts he may, if it so pleases him, afterwards ignore, he is not in a position to set up a special plea of limitation under the Rent Law.3. The other questions to be considered in this case are, whether the Judge. was right in treating this tenure as one which was transferable by sale, and in receiving the receipts put forward by the plaintiff as evidence in the case. It is unnecessary for us to go into the question of wha...
Tag this Judgment!Nundo Kishore Lall Vs. Musst. Ramsookhee Kooer
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal215
Mitter, J.1. This suit is brought for the recovery of money due under a registered bond, dated the 3rd February 1868, executed by the husband of the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The stipulated date of repayment was the 25th May 1869. The present suit was brought on the 21st November 1876. The principal objection taken by the defendant is, that the claim is barred by limitation, and it is apparently so barred, because the suit has not been brought within six years from the 25th May 1869. But the plaintiff's contention in the Courts below was, that the claim was not barred under the provisions of Section 20 of Act IX of 1871, which governs the present suit.2. It has been alleged that, in the year 1875, there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant's husband to pay off the debt due under this bond, by the sale to the creditor of certain property belonging to the debtor, and that the terms of this agreement were reduced to writing, and a kobala was executed by the...
Tag this Judgment!Paddo Kumaree Debee and anr. Vs. Juggut Kishore Acharjee and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal615
Mitter, J.1. The facts which are necessary to be stated to elucidate the points taken before us in this appeal, and the reasons of our decisions upon them, are as follow:2. The property claimed in this suit is admitted to have been held and owned at one time by Gour Kishore, father of Bhowani Kishore and husband of Chundraboli (see the genealogical tree given below). Ram Chundee Chowdhary. ____________________|___________________ | | Krishna Nath Krishna Mohun, (Marr. Dayamoye). | ______|__________ | | | | Daughter Gogun Chunder Son Chundraboli (Defdt. No. 2). Shib Kishore (Marr. Gour (Marr. Gungamoni). Kishore Acharjee). _________|________ | | | Son Brojo Kishore. Joy Kishore Bhowani Kishore (Plaintiff No. 1). (Marr. Bhoobunmoye).3. On the death of Gour Kishore it devolved upon his son Bhowani Kishore by the Hindu law of succession. On the death of Bhowani Kishore without issue, a contest arose in respect of it between Chundraboli and her alleged adopted son, Ram Kishore, on the one h...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Goods of Ram Chand Seal
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal2
Pontifex, J.1. If Hindus take out letters of administration at all, they must take out general letters. I cannot grant you letters of administration limited as you wish....
Tag this Judgment!Loki Mahto and ors. Vs. Aghoree Ajail Lall and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1880)ILR5Cal144
Ainslie, J.1. The first question that aries in this appeal is the nature of the order which the Appellate Court will make under Clause (w), Section 588 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by which an appeal from an order under Section 562 remanding a case, is allowed.2. It is contended, that the only question which the Court has to consider is, whether the remand order is in form such as is provided for by Section 562, and that if it is formally correct, this Court is not, at the present stage, to enter into the merits of the adjudication on the preliminary point. But it appears to us, that there is no such limitation in the Code, and that the intention of the Legislature was, that when the order remanding a case is brought in review before this Court, the Court shall consider the propriety of that order in all respects, and if it is found that the order is defective, the party who had the benefit of a decree in the first Court shall retain that benefit. By Section 629 of the Code it is pr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- Next ›
- Last »