Greedharee Doss v. Nundokissore Doss, Mohunt - Gunga Gobind Mundul v. The Collector of the Twenty- four Pergunnahs Guthrie v. Lister Page - 405 345 129 Jankee Pershad, Baboo Rewun Pershad v. Jodonath Bose v. Shumsoonnissa Begum 25 Maitland, Tareeny Churn Bonnerjee v. Masulipatam, The Collector of, Cavaly Vencata Narraina- pah v. Moonshee Buzloor Ruheem v. Shumsoonnissa Begum 551 Mussumat Cheetha v. Baboo Miheen Lall Rai Baluk Ram, Mussumat Thakoor Deyhee v. Roy Mothooranath Chowdry, Juggomohun Bukshee v. - Begum 517 Nugenderchunder Ghose v. Sreemutty Kaminee Dossee - 241 Nundokissore Doss, Mohunt, Greedharee Doss v. 405 139 120 75 223 295 268 120 7 551 551 28 241 Seetul Pershad v. Mussumat Doolhin Badam Konwur Sunduloonissa Chowdranee, Wise v. Twenty-four Pergunnahs, The Collector of the, Gunga On petition from the High Court at Fort William, Bengal. THIS * Present:-Members of the Judicial Committee-The Right Hon, the Lord Justice Knight Bruce, the Right Hon. the Lord Justice Turner, and the Right Hon. Sir Edward Vaughan Williams. Assessor:-The Right Hon. Sir Lawrence Peel. VOL. XI. grounds, to show that there is a substantial case on the merits, and a On the amended petition, stating in detail the facts and specifically B 4 1866, DOSSEE บ. JUGGUT INDRO NARAIN CHOWDERY. by the High Court of Judicature at Fort William, GOREE MONEE Bengal, which Court refused leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council on the ground, as it appeared from the petition, that it was only a decision in a miscellaneous case, and not a final judgment, decree or Order, within the meaning of sec. 39 of the Charter, dated the 14th of May, 1862, constituting the High Court of the Presidency at Fort William, or the previous Order in Council of the 10th of April, 1838, relating to appeals. The petition set forth the proceedings taken in India under a decree of the Zillah Court of Rungpoor, of the 26th of June, 1837, and in which the ancestors of the Respondents were interested, and stated generally the facts of the case, submitting that the proceedings and Order of the High Court refusing leave to appeal were irregular and contrary to law. Mr. Wood, in support of the petition. The LORD JUSTICE KNIGHT BRUCE: Their Lordships are of opinion, that the statements, both of law and fact, contained in the petition are of too general a character to enable them to judge of the propriety of granting the special leave to appeal prayed for. The petition, therefore, must be either dismissed, with liberty to present another petition, or stand over to amend the petition. In either case the facts alleged in the petition must be verified by an affidavit. The petition was amended, and, after fully detailing the proceedings in the Courts in India and the decrees of the Principal Sudder Ameen and Zillah Judge of Rungpoor and the High Court, |