Imatges de pÓgina
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

ACCRETION.

See ALLUVION.”

ACTION
(Of account).

See EVIDENCE," 1.

1. Appeal restored after being disa

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

ALLUVION.

Land formed by gradual accretion

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

been taken afterthe 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]

346
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]

448

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 thein-
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.

Sreemetty Raddamoney Do88ee] 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

See “ PRACTICE," 12, 13.

AWARD

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
confined to cases in which there is
no deed or Will executed, apply
to the case of a Raj. Baboo
Gunesh Dutt Singh v. Maharaja
Moheshur Singh] -

under it, which had been ordered
to be enforced as a decree of Court,
directed to be taken off the file, as
the Court had no jurisdiction
except upon the fulfilment of there-
quirements of the Regulation.
[Nusserwanjee Pestonjeev. Meer My-
noodeen Khan Wullud Meer Sudrood-
een Khan Bahadoor] • 134

BANKERS' BOOKS.

See “ EVIDENCE," 1.

BENAMEE PURCHASE.

See “ HINDO0 Law," 2.

BOMBAY CHARTER.

[ocr errors]

See “ JURISDICTION," 2.

BOND.

SeeINTEREST,” 2.

CONJUGAL RIGHTS

(Restitution of).

See “ JURISDICTION,'

2.

164
3. Of deed of arrangement in
English form among Hindoos.

See “ HINDOO Law," 1.
4. Of purchase by a Hindoo father

in the name of his son. Held a
benamee transaction.

See “ HINDOO LAW," 2.
5. Of Will of Hindoo.

See WILL," 2.
6. Of wager contracts.

See " WAGER.

CONTRACT.

See " WAGER."

COSTS.

CONSTRUCTION.

1. 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 Regulation. [Nusserwanjee
Pestonjee v. Meer Mynoodeen Khan
Wullud Meer Sudroodeen Khan
Bahadoor-

134
2. Quære: Whether Ben. Regs. XI.

of 1793 and X. of 1800, being

1. Appellant's costs in the Court

below allowed, and sent referred
back to the Master of the Supreme
Court totax the same. [Sreemutty
Rabutty Dossee v. Sibchunder Mul-
lick)

1
2. In reversing the judgment of the

Court below, the Judicial Com-
mittee remitted the cause with cer-
tain directions, leaving the question
of the allowance of costs in the
discretion of the Court below.
[Gopeekrist Gosain v. Gungaper-
saud Gosain] -

· 53
3. In circumstances respecting the

enforcement by Government of
their claim to resume Ghatwally
lands, the Judicial Committee, in

.

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 Gorernment of Bengal] 101
4. Where Government securities for

the due prosecution of the appeal
and costs were deposited in the
Registry of the Suder 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 tho Court below, refused
to give costs of appeal. [Rajah
Bommarauze Bahadur V. Ranga-
saw my 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 Chunder
Raee

289

a decision of the Judges, in such
circumstances, as to the verdict of
ajury in this country,in which the
Judge who tries the cause makes
no objection. [Musadee Mahomed
Cazum Sherazee v. Meerza Ally
Mahomed Shoostry] -

27
(Native).
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 pointsin
dispute. [Hunooman persaud Pan-
day v. Mussumat Babooee Munraj
Koonweree]

393

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

V.

CROSS APPEAL.

See on

PRACTICE," 12.

DAUGHTER.

See “ INHERITANCE,” 3.

DOWER.

COURT

See “ MAHOMEDAN LAW.”

EAST INDIA COMPANY.

(Supremo).

See " RIVER.”

EVIDENCE.

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

1. In an action by a banking firm

against another firm to recover a

no other Vakeel then acting for
him, is such an irregularity, that

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]

232
3. Bom. Reg. IV. of 1827, sec.

cl. 2, imposes no obligation on the
Court, in the absence of

any

alle-
gation in the pleadings of family
usage or custom, to call forevidence
of such fact. [Modee Kaikhooscrow
Hormusjee v. Cooverbhaee] · 448

27,

FAMILY USAGE.

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

EVIDENCE,” 3.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE,

balance upon an account between
ihem, 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
provethat 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

case.

Held, (reversing the Sudier Court's

decree,) that although the Plain-
tiff's books and the Inspector's re-
port were not conclusive evidence,
yet that the necessity of strict proof
was removed by the admission of
the Defendant, and the fact of the
absence by him of any evidence
to impeach the accuracy of the
accounts, the disputed items
being satisfactorily accounted for.
[Dwarka Doss v. Baboo Jankee
Doss]

88
2. The examination of a material

witness of the Plaintiff in the
absence of the Defendant, his
Pakeel having been removed and

VOL. VI.

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 bona fide consideration having
been paid by the vendee, to be

s 2

« AnteriorContinua »