AN

ACCOUNT.

Mode of taking account when the
mortgagee was in possession as
mortgagee, and also as lessee
under a lease. [IIunoomanper-
saud Panday v. Mussumat Babooee
Munraj Koonweree]

See "MAHOMEDAN LAW."

ACCRETION.

See" ALLUVION."

ACTION
(Of account).

See" EVIDENCE," 1.

ALLUVION.
ALLUVI

- 393

Land formed by gradual accretion
belongs to the owner of the ad-
jacent soil. [Doe dem. Seebkristo v.
The East India Company] - 267

ANCESTRAL ESTATE.

Power of Manager to charge by way
of mortgage.

See "MORTGAGE."

"PARTITION."

APPEAL..

1. Appeal restored after being dis-
missed for want of effectual prose-
cution within the time limited by
the fifth rule of the Order in
Council of the 13th of June, 1853;
the new rules having been only
recently adopted by the Sudder
Court at Calcutta, and the Appel-
lant, in ignorance of their exis-
tence, being engaged in taking
steps to prosecute the appeal within
the time and according to the prac-
tice previously existing. [Gudad-
hur Purshad Tewarree v. Mussumat
Soonderkoomaree]
- 201

2. Appeal from the Sudder Court in
India, which stood dismissed under
Rule V. of the Order in Council,
of the 13th of June, 1853, for
want of effectual prosecution, re-
stored, as the Appellant was in
ignorance of the existence of the
new rules, the Sudder Court having
served the Appellant (after the in-
terposition of the appeal) with
notice that two years were allowed
after the arrival of the transcript
in England, for prosecuting the
appeal.

Where Government securities for
the prosecution of the appeal and
costs were deposited in the Registry
of the Sudder Court, the Judicial
Committee, in restoring the appeal,
dispensed with the usual recogni-
zances in England. [Seto Luch-
meechund v. Seto Zorawur Mull] 204
3. If leave to appeal be obtained ex
parte, the Respondent may, as a
matter of course, present a counter-
petition to dismiss. [Sibnarain
Ghose v. Hullodhur Doss] - 207
4. The Judicial Committee have no
jurisdiction to entertain an appli-
cation for extension of time to
appeal until the petition of appeal
is lodged. [Gungadhur Seal v.
Sreemutty Raddamoney Dossee] 209
5. An appeal was allowed in October,
1854, by the Supreme Court at
Calcutta to England. After the
allowance of the appeal no further
steps were taken by the Appellant.
In March, 1856, the Judicial Com-
mittee, upon a certificate of the
Registrar of the Supreme Court,
that no further proceedings had

346

been taken after the Order allow-
ing the appeal, dismissed the
appeal, at the instance of the Re-
spondents, for want of prosecution.
[Sreemutty Rabutty Dossee v. Rada-
nauth Sein]
6. An appeal lies to the Queen in
Council from the decision of a
single Judge of the Sudder Court,
upon the admissibility of a special
appeal. The Bombay Act, No. III.
of 1843, enacts that such refusal
is final, yet not having received
the sanction of the Crown: Held
that its finality was confined to the
Sudder Court, and did not affect the
prerogative of the Crown, or de-
prive the subject of his right of
appeal to the Queen in Council.
[Modee Kaikhooscrow Hormusjee
v. Cooverbhaee]

-

See "PRACTICE," 12, 13.

AWARD.

448

In order to enable the Zillah Court,

under Bom. Reg. VII. of 1827, to
give an award the force of a decree
of Court, the deed of submission
to arbitration must contain all the
conditions required by that Regu-
lation.

Section 3, clause 1, of Bom. Reg.
VII. of 1827, enacts among other
things, that the deed of reference
must contain "the time within
which the award is to be given."
A deed of submission to arbitra-
tion contained no provision for
the time when the award was to
be made by the arbitrator. Held
to be bad, and an award made

reversing the decree of the Special
Commissioners, decreed all the
costs incurred in the proceedings
in India, and in this Court, to be
paid by the Bengal Government.
[Rajah Lelanund Sing Bahadoor
v. The Government of Bengal] 101
4. Where Government securities for
the due prosecution of the appeal
and costs were deposited in the
Registry of the Sudder Court, the
Judicial Committee, in restoring
the appeal, dispensed with the
usual recognizance in England.
[Seto Luchmeechund v. Seto Zora-
wur Mull]
204

5. Where there had been an irregu-
larity in the Court below in the
reception of evidence, the Judicial
Committee, in affirming the judg
ment of the Court below, refused
to give costs of appeal. [Rajah
Bommarauze Bahadur v. Ranga-
sawmy Mudaly -

232

6. Costs awarded a successful Appel-
lant upon appeal, and in all the
proceedings in India from the
commencement of the suit. The
costs incurred in India to be
recovered there. [Bamundoss
Mookerjea Omeish
V.
Race]

-

COURT

(Supreme).

Chunder
289

1. By the constitution of the Supreme
Courts in India, the Judges, for the
purpose of the trial of an action,
sit as a jury as well as Judges, and
the same weight is to be given to

2. Principles upon which the Native
Courts in India are to proceed in
trying issues in suits depending
before them.

If, by inadvertence or otherwise, the
recorded issues do not enable the
Courts to try the whole case on the
merits, the suit ought not to be
disposed of, but an opportunity
should be afforded by amendment,
and, if need be, by adjournment,
for decision upon the real points in
dispute. [Hunoomanpersaud Pan-
day v. Mussumat Babooee Munraj
Koonweree]
393

balance upon an account between
them, the Plaintiff put in evidence
the account-books of his firm, and
the Inspector of the Court certified
that the books were regularly kept,
consistently with the rules of bank-
ing, and that they agreed with the
account rendered by the Plaintiff
to the Defendant. The Plaintiff,
however, examined no witness to
prove that the books were regularly
kept, or the general accuracy of
the particular charges constituting
the demand; he proved admissions
by the Defendant of the correctness
of the account and of an award in
his favour of one of the disputed
items. The Defendant in his de-
fence did not deny the accuracy of
the Appellant's account, or of the
books put in evidence, but objected
to two items in the account, and
claimed a set-off, but examined no
witnesses to rebut the Plaintiff's

no other Vakeel then acting for
him, is such an irregularity, that
if objected to at the proper time
would be fatal to the reception of
such evidence. But where no ob-
jection was urged during the trial,
or until an appeal was interposed,
the Judicial Committee held that
the objection came too late, and
could not be sustained, as, notwith-
standing such irregularity and mis-
carriage, that fact did not taint the
whole proceeding so as to prevent
the Plaintiff recovering upon the
other evidence, which was sufficient
to establish his case. [Rajah Bom-
marauze Bahadur v. Rangasamy
Mudaly]
3. Bom. Reg. IV. of 1827, sec. 27,

232

To assign Raj by deed to single heir.
See "
INHERITANCE," 2.
"EVIDENCE," 3.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE,
To defeat sequestration.

A deed of sale conveying real estate,
the property of a Defendant in a
suit then pending in the Supreme
Court at Bombay. Held, in the
absence of satisfactory evidence of
a bond fide consideration having
been paid by the vendee, to be
s 2